s3 





'(ki^'Aa^ UA^tLcv;.t/w 



q^HE TOWN AND CITY OF WATERBURY, 
^ CONNECTICUT, FROM THE ABORIGINAL 
PERIOD TO THE YEAR EIGHTEEN HUNDRED 
AND NINETY-FIVE. 



EDITED BY JOSEPH ANDERSON, D. D. 



VOLUME I. 
BY SARAH J. PRICHARD AND OTHERS. 



NEW HAVEN : 

THE PRICE & LEE COMPANY. 

1896. 



I 

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1896, 

By the price & LEE COMPANY, 
Jn tlie Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 









FAMILY RECORDS. 



Ap 157 



WOOSTER. WOOSTF.R. 

Henry Wooster, s. of Moses of Wood- 
bury: 

Ned Allen, d. Oct. 30, 1772. 

Mary, his wife d. Apr. 29, 1772, and 
Henry m. Mercy Gillett, d. of Tliomas 
Coshier, Jan. 5, 1773. 

Mary, b. Sept. 5, 1773; d. May 10, 1775. 
Henry, b. Sept. 14, 1775. 
Naomi, b. Nov. 20, 1777.-' 
JMary, b. Nov. 27, 1779. 
Rachel, b. Oct. 5, 1781. 

Jane Wooster m. Jonathan Baldwin, 

1S49. 
Jesse Wooster, s. of Walter, m. Rhoda 

Brocket, d. of Zenas, Mch. 13, 1S13. 

1. Abigail U., b. Dec. 10, 1813. 

2. Emily, b. Jan. 11; d. Mch., 1816. 

3. Emily, b. Jan. 8, 1817. 

4. Walter Z., b. Mch. 8, 1820. 

5. Jesse G., b. June 7, 1S23. 

Miles Wooster: 

Mabel and John, bap. July 21, 1765.2 

Mitchel Wooster m. Hannah E. Terril, 

Mch. 6, 1S22. 
Nancy Wooster ni. A. S. White, 1S32. 
Rebeckah Wooster m. Lyman Smith, 

1.S21. 
Wait Wooster, s. of Abraham, m. Phebe 

Warner, d. of Samuel, Mch. 9, 175S. 

[He was dead June 5, 1770.] 

1. Moses, I 

and Vb. Dec. 21, 175S. 

2. Hinman, J 

3. Mary, b'. Dec. 21, 1760. 

4. Benjamin, b. Oct. 29, 1762. 



Wooster. Young. 

5. Wait, b. Oct. 28, 1764. 

5. Abraham, b. July 28, 1771). 

John W. Worden m. Eliza Goddard, 
Oct. I, 1S51. 

Nathaniel S. Worden of Bridgeport m. 
F. Augusta Leavenworth, Alay 29 
1839. 

Rebekah Worden .m. Eli. Hartshorn, 

1768. 

Joseph Allen Wright m. Abigail Bost- 
wick, Jan. 14, 1781.* 

Melissa Wright m. AlfieJ Forrest, 1846. 

Asa A. Yale of Cheshire m. Sarah M. 
Davis, Oct. 6, 1S50. 

Caroline B. Yale m. E. D. :\Linsfield, 
1850. 

Charlotte Yale m. Theo. Morris, 1S48. 

Ira Yale of Wallingford m. Mary Haw- 
ley, Nov. 17,' 1S30. 

Mary Yale, d. of Elihu, m. Jothani Cur- 
tis, 1754. 

Sarah Yale, d. of Elihu, m. Jesse Curtis, 
1754- 

Rufus Yarrington was m. to Eunice 
Bears, bv Mr. John Trumble, Dec. 28, 
1768. 

Jane A. Yelverton m. John Benedict, 
1 8 50. 

Thomas Young m. Hepzibah Porter [d. 
of JoshuaJ, Dec. 8, 1783.'' 



p.a.i;e. col. line. 



b 
8 


2 


35 
34 


12 


I 


43 


13 


2 


49 


19 


2 


10 


20 


I 


10 


21 


I 


45 




2 


54 


23 


2 


37 


M 


2 


49 
6 


27 


I 


3- 
34 
37 


34 


1 


51 


39 
39 


2 


35 
36 



46 



65 

86 


2 


62 
21 


90 
104 
108 


I 
2 


16 
6i 
61 


113 
126 


2 


54 


143 
143 


I 
I 


18 



ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 

Waiter A. 

Eliab /(v- Eliah. 

Hoadleyyt;;- Hadley. 

1715 /'"■ 1775- 

Richard left also Richard and " Lucrecy. ' 

Add ni. Jesse Fenn. 

,-/</<■/ Scott, d. of Richard of Sunderland, Mass. 

Obed>rObad. 

Mary and Andrew were children of Deacon Andrew. 

Erase this line. 

Anne was wife of Isaac Tattle in 1751. 

Martha m. Hill. 

Comfort m. Martin. 

Esther m. Peck. 

Elizabeth m. Cook. 

1652 yor 1647. 

Salem /();■ Plymouth. Cook m. before 1725, Sarah (Towner), wid. of Samuel Frost of Bran- 
ford, who was, probably, mother of a/l his children. 

Samuel Curtiss d. 1770, leavinix wife Elizabeth, and children — Samuel, Enoch, Azer, Adah 
Levit, Mary Benham, Elizabeth Andrus, Emma Benham, Abi Clark, Content Andru, 
Mindwell Clark and Olive Blakley. 

AddF^h.^. 

Joseph Ciarnsey d. 1764, leaving wife Rachel, and children — Josepli, Ebenezer, Abijah, Job, 
Ann, wife of Daniel Steele, Mary, wife of Solomon Steele, and Philena. 

zjqi _foj- 1S71. 

Probate records (1758) mention also David, Aaron and Nathaniel. 

'759 y^'' '795- 
Norris/Jir Morris. 

Benjamin left a grandson, Charles Plumb. 
This is probably Ruth, d. of John. 

Gideon Skinner, brother of Ebenezer of Hebron, d. 1761, leaving wife Elizabeth, and chil- 
dren — Ann, Timothy and Dorcas. 
Arab Ward, s. of Capt. William of Killingworth, m. Phebe Towner. 
Dianthay^pr Diana. 



158*1' 



BISTORT OF WATEBBUBY. 



DEATHS IN WATERBURY, 

Exclusive of Salem, since March i6, ^797, taken from ^Capt. Ben- 



' jAMiN Upson's Account, by Bennet Bronson.* 



July. 



1800. 
Jan. 



Eldad Hotchkiss' child. 
Joseph Wooster. 
John McCloud's wife. 
Rev. Mr. Thompson s witc. 
Thomas Payne's child. 
Nathaniel Welton's wife. 
William Rowley's child. 
Samuel Nichols. 
Levi Beardy'»;y's child. 
Mille Pardee's child. 
Reuben Warner's wife. 
Fortune, a negro. 
Elizabeth Scott. 
Aseph Brown's child. 
Eli Rowley's chdd. 
Samuel Blakeslee's child 
Benjamin Hitchcock's wife. 
Andrew Bronson, 
John Robbinson. 
Joseph Prichard's child. 

Noah Candee. 

Gershom Bartholomew. 

Mingo, a negro. 

Ezra Pierpont's child. 

Claud (?) Lewis' wife 

3 children of Amasa Cowel. 

2 children of William Clark. 

Lucy Bronson. 

Levi Bronson, 

Jesse Johnson's wife. 

Cyrus Grilley's child, 

James Cowel's wife, 

Joseph Bartholomew's wife, 

Capt. Ben Hine, 
1801 Jesse Johnson's child, 
Tan. 12. Mrs. [James] Baldwin, 
"Feb. 17. William Perkins child, 
Mch. 4. Isaac Bradley, 
" 12. Daniel Tuttle, 
Apr. 5. Mary Slater, 

" 25. John Thompson, 
May 15. Cloe Bartholomew, 
Aug. Levi Smith's girl, 

"' 30. Jesse Hikcox's wife, 
Sept. 21. Wid. Hoadley, 



Jan. 15. 
tjune25. 

" 24- 
July 7. 

" 21. 
Aug. 3. 

" 9- 

" 28. 

Sept. 17. 



Oct. 3. 



Jan. 18. 

Apr. 5. 
" 26. 
May 5. 
June. 
Aug. 26. 
Sept. 
Oct. 20 



Amos Terrill, 
Israel Holmes, 
James H. Warner's child, 
Michael Harrison's child, 
Titus Fulford, 
Andrew Hoadley, 
Aurelia Clark's child, 
Obadiah Richard's child, 
Jonah Hall's wife, 
Fanny Adams, 
David Hoadley's child, 
Joseph Tompkins' child, 
Widow Clark's boy, 
Isaiah Prichard's child, 
Joseph Fairchild's child, 
Truman Hotchkiss' child, 
Ephraim Warner's child, 
Hez. Phelps' child, 
Titus Welton's child, 
Joseph Fairchild's child, 
John Welton, Jr.'s child, 
Anne Welton, 
William Hoadley's child, 
Daniel Hill, 



1804. 
Feb. Manly Hitchcock's child, 

Mch. Wid. Scott, 

Enos Warner's child, 
Mch. 30. Cyrus Grilley's wife (44); child, 
Apr. Q. Joseph Prichard's child, 
" 10. Justus Warner's child, 
Benj. Hikcox, 
Moses Hall's child. 
May. Mrs. Elizabeth Skinner, 
June. Calvin Monson's child, 
William Comes' child, 
Au.n. 29. William Rowley, 

Mr. Terrill's child, 
Oct. 16. Enoch Piatt's child, 

Leonard Baldwin's wife, 
1805. Daniel Jackson's child, 

Apr. Hikcox, 

Aug. 24. Southmayd Bronson s child, 
" 29. John Cossett's wife, 
" 31. Rev. Mr. Bronson's child, 
Sept. 12. Truman Hotchkiss' child, 
" 18. Bethuel Todd's wife, 
1806. 
Mch. 3. James Blaksley's child, 

" 26. John Nolton's child, 
Apr. 7. Joanna Nolton, 

Seth Worden's child, 
June 13. Peg, a negro, 
" TT Daniel Brown, 

Samuel Hill's child, 
Samuel Adams' child, 
Cornelius Johnson's wife, 
Eldad Mix, 
Reuben Warner, 
Ebenezer F. P>ennet, 
David Hine's wife, 

Lydia Hull, 
Mercy Hull, 

Scott. 

lehulah Grilley's wife, 
Samuel Bronson, 3d's, child, 
Jerusha Bradley, 
Ephraim Sanford of Ind., 
Lemuel Nichols, 
Eunice Culver, 
Titus Welton's child, 

Esther Payne, 
Lorana Warner, 
Wid. Hull, 
Crys, a negro, 
Hermon Hall, 
:i:Asabia Baxter, 
Enos Beecher, Wolcott,_ 
Mark Leavenworth's child, 
Samuel Nichols' child, 
Rachel, wife of Ben. Nichols, 
Seth Castle's child, 
James Frisbie of Salem, 
Oct. 25. Philo Beers, 

Joshua Morgan's child, 
iSoo. Benjamin Hitchcock, 
Elijah Crook's wife, 
Ethel Hoadley's child, 
Lemuel Allen, 
Joseph Root's child, 

Caleb Todd, 

Wd. Mary Welton, 





Aug. 24. 


2 


Sept. 23. 


45 


" 25- 


35 


Oct. 30. 


82 


Nov. 9. 


5 


Dec. 19. 


97 


" 21. 


I 


1807. 


8 


Mch. 


27 




75 




52 




19 


May. 


20 

56 


June. 


79 


•' 26. 




Nov. 15. 


70 


Dec. 


34 


1808. 


I 


Jan. 3. 


I 


Feb. I. 


69 


Mch. 4. 


55 


Apr. 8. 


3 m 


" 14 


I 


" 29 


56 


" 29. 


19 


May 14 


3m 


Aug. 12 


I 


" 28 


9 


Sept. 2 


6m 


" 22 



Mch. II. 

" 26. 
Oct. 

1810. 
Jan. 7. 
Feb. 13. 



4m 

64 
6 

I w 
6 w 

4 
40 

I w 
83 



74 



40 

id 

I 

6 

4 

54 

'\ 
1 d 



53 
23 

70 

3 

19 
33 
61 
84 

7 

20 
13 
77 
24 

25 

26 

40 
im 
2d 



37 
19 

I 
56 
25 

6 m 
62 

6 m 



* More than six hundred names were found in this list, but certain of the number have been pmitted 
i,„nnnspViven elsewhere. For the year 1815, the year of greatest mortahty within the period, the list is given 
mfre After Capt. Benjamin Upson's decease, in March of 1824, the work was continued by a person unknown 
?„ fV„.'romDiler to August, 1825, when it was taken up in the Public Records, 
to 'he compiler, w^A^g^^ ^^^._^5, ^^ ^.^^ ^^ Demerara, May 11. % Mr. Asabia ScoviU on grave-stone. 



DEATHS IN WATERS URT. 



Apl59 



Mch. 



Apr. 20. 
Aug. 15. 



Jr 



Abraham Prichard's wife, 
Joseph Root's wife, 
Joseph Root's child, 
Eunice Bronson, 
Two children of Isaac Allen, 
Wife of Do. 

" 28. Infant of Isaac, 
Sept. 23. Roswell Pardee's child, 
Hannah Nichols' child, 
1811. Samuel Grilley's child, 
Mch. 24. John Lounsbury's wife, 
Apr. 15. Horace Harrison's child. 
May 25. Amos Prichard, Jr.'s, 
28. Lorren Barnes, Esq., 
July. Moses Beach's child, 

2Q. John Lounsbury, 
Sept. 9. Asahel Roberts', 

" 27. Joshua Pelly of Vir., 
Oct. 19. Reuben Adams' child, 
Nov. 30. Wester Allen, 

1S12. 
Apr. I. James Blakesley's child, 

3. Ro.xy Adams' child, 
Aug. 30. A stranger, 

Isaac Bronson's child, 
Sept. Lewis Hungerford s child, 
Nov. 27. Mr. Lounsbury, 
1813. Elias Root's child, 

Hannah Bartholomew, 
Mch. 12. Shadrack Benham, 
" 13. Julia Nichols, 

19. Wid. iNIercy Bronson, 
May. James Warner, 
Sept. 14. Rosa Bill Selkrigg, 

" ig. Sarah Merrill, 
Oct. 30. Zenas Brockett's wife, 
Hannah, a negro, 
Isaac Benham, 
Daniel Roberts, 

Joel Perkins' wife, 
^^ Luther Pierpont's child, 

30. Samuel Blakeslee, 
Feb. I. Edmund Austin's child, 

" 18. Sally Hotchkiss, 
Mch. 12. Saloma Peck, 

19. Samuel Seymour's child, 
Asa Bronson's child, 
Harriet Hodges, 
William Bradley, 
Ralph Doohttle's wife, 
Amos Terrel's child, 
Wid. Cook, 
Elijah Porter, 
Amos Prichard, 
W'id. Elizabeth Brown. 



Nov. 28. 
Dec. 12. 

1814. 
Jan. 8. 



Apr. 18. 
June 2. 
Nov. 2. 
Dec. 15. 
" 17- 



1815. 
Jan. 



Feb. 



Mch. 
June. 

Apr. 13. 
June 30. 

July 13. 
20. 
21. 



28. 
Aug. 19. 



30. 
Sept. 2. 



Moses Beach's child, 
. Sally Nettleton, 

George Cook, 

Alfred Payne, 

Thomas Clark's wife Elizabeth. 

Miles Nichols, 

Joel Roberts, 

Wid. Elizabeth Terrell, 

A. Bryan's child, 

Preserved Porter Bronson, 

Wife of John Welton, Esq., 

Benj. Hotchkiss, 

Wm. Warner's child, 

Charles Leonard's child, 

Moses Beach's wife, Anne, 

\\ id. Lvdia Warner, 

Elizabeth Terrell, 
Rev. Luke Wood's child, 
Johnson Warner's child, 
Calvin Hotchkiss, 
Sophia Judd, 
Albert Burton, 
John Tuttle's wife, 
William Seely's child, 
Samuel Judd, Jr.'s widow, 
Wid. Lucy Porter's cliild, 
Enoch Woodruff's child, 
Wm. Seely's child, 
Luke Wood's child, 



I w 
I w 

I d 

1 w 

2 m 
73 

T li 



23 

3 in 

33 

2 w 
I m 
60 



6 in 
66 
77 
17 
76 

52 
12 



30 

I 
41 

I 
25 
18 

6m 

2 m 
19 
73 



Sept. 4. Cyrus Clark's child. 
II " Orlando Porter's child, 
8. Giles Ives' child, 
Q. Sally Holmes, 
\\ '' Dr. Fields' child, 

Maylen Northrop's child 
16. Merrit Piatt, 
Stella Scovill, 
" 25. Heinan Pardee's child, 
^^ Stiles Thompson's child, 

26. Capt. Phineas Castle, 
Oct. 2. Heman Pardee's child, 
1^ 7. Dan. Clark's child, 

8. Emma Scott, 
" 9. Albert B. Clark, 
II II. Elijah Merrill's daughter, 
14. Narcissa Johnson. 
21. Lucy Ann Martin, 
II 28. LeGrand Sheldon, 
I' 27. Elijah Nettleton's wife 
^' 29. Carlos Sheldon of Pliny, 
" 30. Mrs. Baldwin, 
Susan Burton, 
Nov. II. Dan Wright's child, 
Mark Warner, 
David Bronson's child, 
David Bronson's child, 
24. David Clark, 
Wid. Scott, 
Dec. 20. Gideon Finch, 

1816. 
Jan. 17. Ithamer Todd, 
Feb. 2. Isaac Prichard's child, 
Apr. I. Anne Lambert, 
" 21. Jared Hill, 

William Seely's child, 
Aug. 8. Elon Clark's child, 
Sept. 30. Eli Bronson, 
Nov. 30. Irena Taylor 
Dec. 14. Wid. Taff, 
Wid. Allen, 

1817. Stephen .Scovill's child 
Apr. 5. Titus Welton's child 
May 12. Thomas Warden's child, 
June 24. Dr. Abner Johnson, 
Oct. Samuel Root's child 

1818. Elias Prichard's child, 
teb. 10. John Withington, 

Lucius Upson, 
May Curtis Brown's child 

June 12. Lois Terrell, 
Nov. 26. David Mine [father of Newtonl 

1819. •" 
Feb. 12. Austin Hayden's child, 

^^ 21. Curtiss Brown's child, ' 
24. " " " 

Mch. 6. Mr. North's child, 
" 12. Tim. Frost's wife,' 
Sept. 12. Wid. Hall, 

Hez. Todd's wife, 
. Obadiah Scovill's child, 
. Wid. < )sborn. 

Three infants of Erastus Lewis 
Huldah Payne, 
Wd. Lydia Johnson, 
Infant of Miles Morris. 

Joshua (?) Warner's child 
.=:,. Enos Root, ' 

Sept. Wid. Mary Prichard, 
Dec. 23. Hiram Nichols, 

1821. 
Jan. 26. Mary Lewis, 
Feb. 22. Charles Nichols' wife, 
Mch. 25. Cyrus Grilley's wife 
May Wid. Withington, 

^^ Ephraim Welton's child, 

20. Benj. Benham's wife, 
John Hine, Jr.'s child, 
Ehas Perkins' child, 
Hannah Hotchkiss, 
Anson Stocking's wife, 
Joseph Pierpont, 
Phyllis, a negro, 
John Baxter's w^ife. 



29 


Sept. 12 


9 
18 


Nov. 6 


73 


" 19 


9 


1820. 


77 


Jan. 2 


75 
Id 


Aug. 


21 

84 


" iS 



6 
8S 

iK 

iK 
14 

8 
15 
37 

5 

5 
56 



9 m 
I m 

24 

30 

21 

60 

S3 



160 AP 



HISTORY OF WATEBBVBT. 



57 



1822. , „ ,j 

Tan 22. Millinda Todd 
Mch 22. Elijah Nichols' wife, 
May 2. A Mr. Cady, 

" 23. Sanniel Potter ,, ■ , „ 

Tulv David Ford of Woodbndge. 

■' " ,0. Hannah Hartshorn 
Oct Mr. Luke Wood s child, 

"■ 16 Col. F.ela Welton. 

" Cornelius Johnson, 

Jan.^^12. Joshua Moses g,. 
Feb. I. Martin Upsorrs chd. 

May Thomas Judd's chid, i 

^ Noble Judd's child, I 

Sent 8. ]ohn Hull, , , ., , o, 

■^ Shepard Hayden's child, ,„ ,, 3' 

.' .6. Mr Byir.gton [Augustus, of Hambden, ^^ 

Noy. 27. wffelf^Mr. Poach, [66?] 76 

" 28. Cyrus GriUey, ^, 

Dec. 15. Lois INIcCloud, -^ 
Ian 'm. Dinah Gurley [d of Benj. Nichols ?] 63 

•' Wid. of Eldad Mix, ^^ 

Feb. 17- Joseph Holt ^ 

Mch. 12. Ca/i. SeHj/M>! ' 

Abraham Prichard, / 

May 26. Wid. Lois Pricliard, y 

Aue. 3. Henry Bronson's child, ^ 

Oct^[25] Wid. Martha Root 68 
Isaac Bronson's child. 



94 
78 

50 
62 
67 



Feb 2S. Johnson Anderson, 
IMch il Wid. Patience Porter, 

" 22. Ralph Doolittle, 

" 29 Lue [Leavy] Treat, 
June 29. Thomas Payne, 

July 24. Thomas Wood, - 
Aug. Lewis Stebbms, 

rontinued on the fly-leaves of the Second Book of 
..W^areZr; Records £MarH^ 

^rrbl"rWryS^o^;et;.'?''[gAs^.'ieyScott,townclk.] 

Sept! ». Capt. Samuel Judd (old age), 91 

Oct 7 Marcus Botsford s Wife, . , > ■*« 

-■ 23' Horatio Gates Bronson (tip»^ fever), 48 

" 27 Joseph Nichols, ^^ 49 

" 28 Lewis Prichard, s. of Isaac, 19 

" 2q" GeorgeW.Camp,s.ofGide.ni, 20 

Nov 3. John McLand (old age), , , , '■° 

^ ?. f' Col Marcus Bronson (typhus fever), 30 

" 10 Capt. Pliny Sheldon (consumption), 39 

" iS' Almon Clark's wife (typhus fever), 2b 

" 2c' Roswell Pratt (died at Winchester), 

buried here (typhus fever), _ bi 
" 06 Capt. Timothy Gibbud in Society of 

Salem (typhus fever), 04 

" " Tames Scovill, Esq. (comphcated), 62 

Dec 9 Ezekiel Smith (fever), 44 

" ■ II Capt. Toseph Bronson, ^^ 57 

" 23 Edward Prichard, s. Isaac, ^^ 24 

" ,1' William Clark, ,.,,,,, , x "'' 
" 20 Austin Pierpont's child (black canker), 4 
^y- in 4 months —17 

Ja'u'^i'i. Else Frost (old age). Si 
iMcb. 6. Merit Bronson, son of H. G. (t>p. 

pleurisy), . ^ 

Apr. 9. Daniel Grilley (pleurisy), 73 

- 14. Lucy Grilley (old age), 80 

June 14. Rol'c" I'oP':' „ .. q6 

•^ " 25. Widow Sarah Brown, ^^ 9« 



Feb"^ 4 Sally L. Prichard, dau. of David, Jr. 
(dropsy in the head), 
" 17. Child of Chauncey Adams (dropsy in 

the head), . ^ 

Apr 7 Lucy Terrell (consumption), 7° 

Elon Clark's wife, 32 

Tulv -^ David Welton, . '5 

•* ■'■ 7' David Baldwin, Jr. (fall from building), 5" 

" oi Lewis Scott (consumption). 3^ 

" 0/ Thadeus Hitchcock's child (canker), 4 

" -,4. Jonas Boughton's child, 4 

Aug 7. John nine's wife (bilhous), 3° 

"10 David Clark's widow (dropsy), 88 

" 27. Abner Brown (consumption;, 39 

Sept 2S. Grove Martin, ' 33 

" ■ 28. Wife of Ezra Pierpont, 05 

Oct. 12. Jesse Frost, 2.i^ 

Un'^\ Wife of Samuel Bronson (consumption), 47 

"■ 2^ William Adams (inflamation), »o 

Mch ig Wid. Prudence Chatheld (old age), 92 

May' 10. Lieut. Eaton (consumption), 24 

" 14 Abi Welton, , I 

Tuly 6. Amos Mix (erysipelas), 24 

" 8 Wid. Mercy Bronson, 54 

Aug. 12. Ezra S. Pierpont, 32 

" IS Child of Henry Sexton s (rattles), 4 

" " Wife of Hezekiah Todd, died in 

Cheshire (dropsy), , ^ 5° 

" 22. Child of Rev. Asa Train s, i 

" 28. Simeon Scott (old age), °° 

Sept 20. Child of George Root's (dysentery) 2 

Oct 14 Widow Susannah Bronson (old age), 91 

"' 16. Child of Edward Russell, 4 
Dec 6. " Luther Pierpont s (dropsy 

in the head), ^ 

" 6 Charles Leonard s infant, j 

" 17" E. F. Merrill's child, 1 \ J 
- 26 Joseph E. Chattield's wife (blk. canker), 28 
" .8. Dauf of Wm. Clark, deed, named 

Fanny (consumption), -5 



/ 



Tan 8 Cyrus Clark, Esq. (apoplexy), 
"■ 10 Timothy Frost (old age), 
" 12 Medad Alcox (pleurisy), 

Feb. 12. Nathan Piatt's wife 

" iq Simeon Scott's wife (old age), 

Mch I. Seabury Pierpont (lung fever), 
" 8 Joel Finch (dropsy), 
" 21. Andrew Poach (old age), 

Mav s. Newton Hine's wife. 



Tulv 10. Joseph Holt, ,, ^ \ 

Aug 8 Child of Toseph Lang (dysentery), 4 

^?r' Wid. Hannah Adams (consumption), 24 
Sent "3 " Eliz. Baldwin, " 73 

'■ ■ n Stephen Hotchkiss, • , , ,n '^^ 

( )ct I- Samuel B. Northrop (dropsy in the chest) 41 

"■ ,i' Widow Rachel Johnson (dropsy), 42 

■n^r ■>&' " Eunice Hill (old age), 85 

•l-'ec- -°- In one year —14 



56 
84 
50 
66 

79 
42 
40 

79 
s. iNewcon nuic = wjiv,, , , ^ ?~ 

Q. Richard F. Welton (typhus fever), b- 

Tulv 20. Widow Lvdia Todd, 7\ 

lune Merit Tompkins' child (whoop'gcough), 4 
July William Ortin's infant. _ 

■^ "' 22 Hiram Scott's infant (whooping cough). 
Sept 7. Lydia, wife of Giles Daily, 75 

'^ " Amos Ternll (fever), 65 

Oct 3 Huldah, wife of Noah Bronson, 54 

"■ 7 Amos Terrill, 2d (lung fever) 22 

- 27 Philena, widow of David Perkins and 

dau.ofAmosTerrill,dec'd(lungfev.), 33 

" 28. David Downs' wife, ^9 

Nov 17. Bin Todd an Idiot, ^ 

Dec. 14. Mary Pratt (consumption), r7 

" 26. Ichabud Merrill (old age) 7^ 

" 29. Roxa, wife of Henry Saxton, 3^ 

Feb^°io Wife of Samuel C. Bronson, age not known 
"• 3 Frances, the dau. of Aaron Benedict (sudden). 
Apr ii" Anson Bronson's child (dropsy in head), 2 
Mav 3 Ann Porter (consumption), 4° 

"^ i6' John Sandlaud's child (dropsy in head), s 
" 29. Ulissa Holt (lung fever), ^9 

June 7- Benjamin Farrell s son (canker), 13 

-^ " 29. Daniel Upson's wife (dropsy), 57 

Tuly 6 Benjamin Brockett's wife (dropsy), 65 

Aug. 14. John Lampson (consumption), p^^^^, 

Dic^, a negro, d. Jan. 12, 1835, a. 9°-acc. to Bennet 

Riclfard"F°re;man [negro] d. Jan. 12, 1835, a. about 96 
—says Rev. Allen C, Morgan. 



ADDITIONS TO THE FAMILY RECORDS. 



Andrews. 



Adams. 
Abraham Adams: 

David, b. June 6, 1764; ni. Sarah Tyler. 

Andrew Adams: 

The first three children died in infancy 
Clarissa (called Clara); m. David Hopkins about 

1817. 
Hannah; m. Edwin Warner, and had Marv b 

1826; Andrew, b. Dec. 28, 1838 ' 

Nabby; m. about 1828 Lewis Mansfield, and had 

George, Henry, Harriet, Warren and Sarah 

Removed to New York. 
Constant L.; m Emily Davis, dau. of Truman, 

w?,' ^J"L ''','^- '<'=^^'=^' ^- Dec. 4, iS^r (Mrs! 

Willard Hopkins), and Enos Osborn,'b Sept 

10, 1833. ' 

Harriet; m. Oliver Evans and had Grace and 

Kichard. 
Eineritt; m. Theo. Bocimsdes and had Orrow 

t ranklin and Ellen. ' 

Lyman Adams, s. of Reuben, m. Alma 
Rebecca Baldwin of Watertown, Sept 
17, 1S40. 

John Alcox's wife was dau. of /o/tn 
Blakeslee (according to James Shep- 
ard of New Britain). 

Gideon Allyn, from Guilford in 1740 
says " my brother Elwell." 

Abraham Andrus, Sr., was s. of Francis 
of Hartford and Fairfield, who died 
1662. 

Abraham Andrus, cooper, s. of John and 
Mary of Farmington, b. Oct. 31, 164S, 
m about 16S2 Sarah Porter, dau. of 
Robert and his wife Mary (dau of 
Thomas Scott). Sarah was b. Dec. 20, 
1657, and both joined the Farmington 
church July 15, 1683. He d. May 3, 
1693, and Sarah m. Mch. 2, 1707, James 
Benedict of Danbury. 

1. Sarah, bapt. at Farmington, Mch. g, 1683-4- m 

Th. Raymond. j t. • 

2. Abraham, bapt. at Farmington, July 17 1687- 

probably d. unmarried. ' 

3. Mary, bapt. at Farmington, May 18, i68q- m 

James Benedict, Jr. 

4. Benjamin, probably d. young. 

5. Robert, b. 1693; m. Anna Olmstead. 

Gordon Spencer Andrews, b. June 17, 
1809, s. of Timothy F., m. Nov. 17,' 
1S44, Catharine Denning of New 
Britain 

Hannah Andrews, b. Feb. 26, 1647, dau. 

of John, m. Obadiah Richards, 1666. 
Henry R. Andrews, s. of Gordon, m 

July 18. 1S40, Lucinda M. Brooks of 

Haddam. 

James Andrews and Martha: 

Thomas, b. Aug. 19, 1785. 

Laura Andrews, dau. of William, m. 

Seth Thomas, Apr. 14, 1811. 
Thomas Andrews, d. in Hartford, Sept. 

12, 1754. 

17* 



Arnold. t^^ 

•cy V ., « Belcher. 

Elizabeth Arnold, wife of Nathaniel d 

iMay 23, 1750. ' • 

Noah Arnold, s. of Nathaniel, Tr d 
Feb. 14, 175S. -' ' • 

Timothy Atwater, b. xMay 6, 1756; Lydia, 
his wite, b. June 5, 1756. 

Edmund Austin, b. Dec. 12, 17-^,8 in 
Wallingford, s. of Joshua and Me'rcv 
m. Nov. 29, i7(,4, Sarah Ives. 

Benjamin Baldwin, erase b. Dec //, 77,-6. 

Malinda; m. Jonas Bronson. 

Ebenezer Baldwin, b. 1708; his wife d 
June 17. 17S7. 

Capt. Nathaniel Barnes: 

7. Eunice, bapt. Mch. 2, 1766. 

Daniel Bartholomew: 

Martha, Ij. 177^. d. 1795. 
Solomon, b. 1788, d. 1803. 

Stephen Bateman, b. in Southburv Apr 
lO, 1800. Maria, his wife, b. Apr "3' 
1S03. Removed to New Jersey. ' ~ 

1. Harriet Goodyear, b. Nov. 23 1827 

2. Esther, b. Aug. 8, 1829. 

3. Cynthia Goodyear, b. Aug. 6, 1831 

4. Augusta Hoadley, b. Mch". i, 1834 ' 

5. Helen Caroline, b. Aug. 20, 1836. ' 

Benjamin Bates, m. Lorinda, dau of 
Captain Abraham Foot. 

Joseph Beach, b. June 10, 1714 s of 
Nathan and Jemima (Curtiss), m. last 
ot October, 1734, Experience Beecher. 

1. Lydia, b. Sept. 13, 1735. 

2. Mehitable, b. Nov. 2, 1738. 
3^ Mary, b. Dec. 2, 1740. 

4. Elizabeth, b. Feb. 24, 1742-3. 

5. John, b. Jan. 25, 1744-5. 

6. Joel, b. Sept. 23, 1747. 

7. Sarah, born 1749. AH born in Wallingford. 

Moses S. Beach was of New York. 

Augustus Beebe, s. of David, m Eunice 
Smith about 1806. 

1. Jane, b. Sept., 1807; m. Burr Benham, 1820 

2. Mary Ann b. July 4, 1811; m. Andrew L. 

Brown, Nov. ii, 1832. 

3. Augustus Adolphus, b. Sept., 1S12. 

Ira Beebe bequeathed to his grandson 
and heir, Stephen Tinker, \'hild of 
Ursula Beebe, /6o. Jemima, his wife 
d. iSij;. ' 

Seba Beebe, s. of Jonathan, m. in West- 
minster, Vt., and had nine children. 
Zera Beebe: 

Parthena; m. John Tinker. 

Daniel Beecher; Abiah, his first wife d 
Oct. II, 1790. Electa, his second wife' 
d. May 14, 1802. ' 

Suca (Sukey), b. 1783; d. 1799. 
Julius, b. 1793; d. 1803. 
Abiah, b. 1795; d. Aug. 31, 1816. 
Esther, b. 1798; d. 1799. 



1G2 ^1' 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Benham. Bkonson. 

Ebenezer Benham, was s. of Ebenezer 
of New Haven, who d. before 1763. 

Ruth Benham d. May 30, 1S26, a. 47. 

Jacob Bidwell, Jr., m. Martha Tomp- 
kins at Watertown, Nov., 1790. 

Joseph Blake of Middletown, s. of John, 
m. 1734, Esther Bacon. 

I Esther, b. Oct. 14, 1736; m. Amos Guernsey. 
2'. Joseph, b. Dec. 22, 173S (of Tornngton). 
;. Richard, b. Nov. 3, 1740; d. 1744. 
4 Seth, b. hH\. 25i i743- 
5. EHzabeth,vbS^nd d. 1746. 

Esther d. M^^. 12, 1746. and Joseph m. 
Sept. 25, 1746, Rebeckah Higby, wid. 
of John^Dowd. Joseph d. Nov. i, 1760. 
Rebeckah probably returned to ISIiddle- 
town and m. Joseph Wetmore, Oct. 12, 
1761. 

6 Richard, j m. in Litchfield, Damaris 

and \h. Oct. 7, 1747. Smedley. 

7. Elizabeth, ) 

S. Ruth (or Lucretia), b. Sept. 4. 1749. 
0'. Freelove, b. in Waterbury, 1751. 

Seth Blake, s. of Joseph, m. A7t>te Wet- 
more, and d. June 5. 1781. Anne m. 
Hezekiah Hale of Middletown, Oct. 
29, 1733- 

Thomas Blake, nephew of Richard, en- 
listed in Waterbury, 177^. and received 
three bounties. 

Bede Blakeslee, dau. of David, ni. Eben- 
ezer Goss. 

Abigail, w. of Ephraim Bostwick, d. 
April 20, 17Q0, aged 77-6-3- 

Giles Brackett, s. of Richard (and a 
granddaughter of Rev. James Pierpont 
Sf New "Haven), was b. in North 
Haven, Apr. 30, 1761, and m. Sarah 
Smith, b. July 10, 1768, dau. of Capt. 
Stephen of East Haven. He came to 
Waterbury 1803, and d. June 2, 1S42. 
Sarah d. Nov. 27, 1841. 

I. Polly, b. Nov. 17, 1786; m. Maj. Samuel Hill. 

r,' Sally, b. Tune 20, 1788; m. Smith D. Castle and 
removed to Camden, N. Y.; had Samuel D., 
Chloe S., Grace A., Giles, Harriet, Sarah, 
Orlando, Orson, Almira and Flora. 

■,. Patty, b. Apr. 29, 1791; m. Andrew H. John- 
son—who made spinnmg-wheels in Waterbury 
in 1807— and had William, Edward, Nancy, 
Lydia. 

4 Harriet, b. Nov. 28, 1794; m. Col. Samuel Peck 
of Prospect and removed to Bloomfield, N. Y. 

r. Roswell, b. July 17, 1796- ^ ., ,,.,, 

6. Lydia, b. July 2T, 170S; m. Smith Miller and 
removed to Camden, N. Y. 

John Bronson, b. Jan., 1644, s. of John, 
m. Sarah, dau. of Moses Ventris and 
d. 1696, before Nov. 7. Sarah d. Jan. 
6, 171.1-12. 

I John, b. 1670; d. in Farm., June 15, 1716. 

2" Sarah, b. 1672; m. Ezekiel Buck. 

-' Dorothy, b. 1675; m. Stephen Kelsey of Weth- 

ersfield. 
4. Ebenezer, b. 1677; m. Mary Munn, Aug. 13, 

1702, and d. 1727. 



Bronson. 



Constant. 



5. William, b. 1682; m. 1707, Esther Barnes, and 

d. 1761 in Farmington. 

6. Moses, b. 1686, ni. Jane Wiat. 

7. Grace, b. 1689; m. in 171 1, Jacob Barnes, s. of 

Joseph of Karmington. 

James Brown m. Oct. 31, 1704, Elizabeth 
Kirby, b Feb. 20, 1683, eldest child of 
Joseph Kirby (b. July 17, 1656, only 
surviving son of John Kirljy, one of the 
original settlers of Middletown) and 
Sarah ]\Iarkham, who were m. at Weth- 
ersfield, Nov. 10, 1681. 

Children b. at New Haven: 

1. Elizabeth, b. Nov. 1705. 

2. Eunice, b. Oct. i, 1707. 

3. James, b. June 5, 1709. 

4. Sarah, b. Nov. 9 1711; m. Dan. Thomas. 

5. Dinah, b. June 14, 1714. 

6. Joseph, b. Sept. 20, 1716. 

7. Klam, b. July 28, 1719. 

8. Asa, b. Sept. 17, 1721. 

William Brown: 

3. Eliza J., b. Apr. i, iSj6. 

Hezekiah Bunnell d. Nov. 24, 1797, a. 37. 

John Camp, s. of Joab, was a Congrega- 
tional minister. 

John Castle m. Freelove, dau. of Samuel 
Brown. Her heirs were Isaac B., 
Chloe Tuttle, Minerva Matthews, Be- 
thial and Joel. 

Daniel Chatfield's children were bapt. 
]May 26, 1817. 

George E. Chipman m. Mary (or Maria) 
Duttdu of Watertown, June 13, 1843. 

Caleb Clark, s. of Ebenezer and Eliza- 
beth (Royce), b. at Wallingford, Sept. 
6, 1701. 

Chauncey Clark d. Dec, I795- 

Elon Clark m. Sally Hall. 

Joseph Clark m. Marah Parker of Wal- 
lingford. 

Lvdia; m. Caleb Wheeler. 
Deborah; m. Samuel Sanford, Jr. 

Rev. Silas Constant is said to have been 
" son of Col. Joseph Constant, an offi- 
cer of the French army, who m. in 
JNIarch, 1849, Susan Terrell, dau. of 
Elijah of Salem, Mass. (?) Soon after 
this marriage. Col. Constant sailed for 
France to "arrange his affairs. The 
vessel on which he sailed Avas never 
heard from, and Mrs. Constant died 
soon after the birth of Silas in Water- 
bury, bequeathing him to the care of 
her sister, who had married a Beebe." 
Althotigh Silas Constant's name ap- 
pears frequently on our .records, and 
his birth is recorded with the family of 
Jonathan Beebe, there is no hint of his 
relationship to the family. Beebe's 
will— which he did not sign — gives 
"to Silas Constant ^50, when he be- 
comes of age." No Elijah Terrell has 



PREFACE. 

THE publication of a new History of Waterbury was first 
seriously considered by the firm of Price, Lee & Co. m the 
summer of 1887. The undersigned was invited at that time 
to take in hand the preparation of such a work, but felt compelled 
to decline the task. He gave to the publishers, however, the 
names of two writers whom he regarded as well fitted for the 
work, and in September the following notice appeared in the public 
prints: "Price, Lee & Co. of New Haven announce that their His- 
tory of Waterbury is in course of preparation, — the first hundred 
years in -charge of Miss vSarah J. Prichard, and the last hundred 
years in charge of Miss Anna L. Ward." More than a year after 
this (on November 16, 1888) the firm issued a circular, in which, 
after referring to the publication of Bronson's History in 1858 and 
to the remarkable development of Waterbury since then, and 
expressing the conviction that the time had come for a new history 
of the town and city, they announced that arrangements had been 
completed for the preparation of such a work, and solicited the 
cooperation of those interested in the subject. In addition to Miss 
Prichard and Miss Ward, "the Rev. Dr. Joseph Anderson, the 
Hon. F. J. Kingsbury and Mr. H. F. Bassett " were mentioned as 
having been engaged to contribute chapters upon special topics 
or periods. From that time until now the work has been going 
forward with but little interruption, and in addition to those already 
mentioned several other writers have been enlisted, as indicated 
in the table of contents. 

Up to the date of the issue of the circular just referred to, but 
little had been done toward putting on record the history of Water- 
bury. Interesting references to the town had occasionally been 
made by the early writers, as for example by President Timothy 
Dwight in his "Travels in New England and New York"; Barber 
in his " Historical Collections," in 1836, had devoted to it an enter- 
taining chapter (prepared, by the way, by Judge Bennet Bronson); 
Charles Burton had published in the National Magazine, in 1857, his 
articles on the " Valley of the Naugatuck," two of them relating 
to Waterbury; Orcutt had issued in 1875 his "History of Wolcott," 
covering an important section of the old town; biographies of 
Waterbury men had appeared in such works as the " Biographical 



iv PREFACE. 

Encyclopedia of Connecticut and Rhode Island," and the "Repre- 
sentative Manufacturers of New England," and in the Leaven- 
worth, the Benedict, the Terry and the Hoadley genealogies; 
special subjects had been touched upon in such books or pamphlets 
as those of Chauncey Jerome and Henry Terry on clock making, 
and those by Messrs. Kingsbury and Anderson enumerated on 
pages 959-962 of our second volume; the Waterbury Almanac, begun 
in 1853, had garnered from year to year, so long as its issue con- 
tinued, the facts not only of the passing time but of the earlier 
days; the newspapers, for nearly half a century, had been making 
their daily or weekly record, and — most important of all — Dr. 
Bronson had published his History, embodying in it materials 
derived by his father from documents that have entirely disap- 
peared. But Dr. Bronson's work was completed within five years 
after Waterbury became a city, and was practically limited in its 
scope to the period that closes with the Revolutionary war. His 
account of "manufacturing in Waterbury," for instance, fills less 
than four pages. There was a clear field for the modern historian, 
and much interesting material in reference to the earlier times 
which had not yet been made use of. The claim of the circular, 
that in view of the rapid growth of Waterbury, the " marvellous 
development of the industries by which it has became known 
throughout the world," and the additional facts concerning its earlier 
period that had come to light, the time had arrived for a new his- 
tory of the town and city, seemed fully justified. 

The plan of the work, as indicated from the start, contemplated 
a book divided into two volumes, embracing about a century each. 
After a time the accumulation of materials for the modern period 
was so great that it became necessary that as much as possible 
should be crowded into the first volume. The line separating the 
two volumes was accordingly drawn through 1825, the year of the 
organization of Waterbury as a borough, and this involved the 
division of the history of the First church, of vSt. John's parish and 
the cemeteries of the town into two parts, the earlier of which is 
to be found in Volume I and the later in Volume HI. 

A recognition of the successive territorial partitions of the 
original township involved our including in our scheme the history 
of Watertown and Plymouth to 1780, of Wolcott to 1796, of Middle- 
bury to 1807, of Prospect to 1826 and of Naugatuck to 1844. The 
earlier history of these derivative towns is covered substantially by 
the narrative in Volume I, the only important exception being the 
history of Salem society (now Naugatuck) from the Revolution 
to its incorporation as a town, which it seemed best to leave, with 



PREFACE. 



the exception of the Salem church, to some future historian to 
reproduce on a scale commensurate with its importance. 

The narrative of the colonial and revolutionary periods is the 
result of an independent study by Miss Prichard of the original 
sources including documents that have come to light since Dr. 
Bronson's History was written. This study was pursued with but 
little reference to Bronson, although the value of his labors was 
known from the beginning. It ought to be understood, however, 
that it was not the purpose of the author or the editor to super- 
sede the earlier work ; on the contrary, certain subjects to which 
Bronson devoted special attention are in this History passed over 
lio-htly for that reason. It may be added that Dr. Bronson, to the 
hour of his death, was deeply interested in the present enterprise. 
The outline given at the opening of the second volume indicates 
the largeness of the plan upon which the modern history of the 
town and city was projected. It has been carried out with a ful- 
ness of detail hardly anticipated even by the editor when he 
prepared the schedule of topics for the guidance of his collabora- 
tors It is therefore safe to say that this History is more extended 
in its scope and more exhaustive in details than any town history 
thus far published. This is made evident in the treatment given to 
the several departments of the city government, and to special topics 
not heretofore included in local histories, as shown in the chapters 
on street names, corporations, inventors and their patents, college 
graduates, philanthropic institutions, amusements and fraternities. 
While the fact has never been lost sight of that Waterbury is a great 
manufacturing centre, while the manufactories and the men who 
have controlled them have had justice done to them, at the same 
time a serious effort has been made to represent the many other 
phases of the life of a prosperous modern city. By following a 
plan constructed with some reference to modern sociology, the 
History has become almost cyclopaedic in its character, and instead 
of being, as the prospectus proposed, a work " in two volumes, of 
about 500 pages each," has grown into three volumes, with a total 
of 2250 pages. The liberality of the publishers in furnishing to 
subscribers' so much more than was promised deserves to be recog- 
nized here, and this may serve at the same time as an explanation 
of the delay in the completion of the work. 

In view of the attention given to details, the casual reader will 
be surprised at certain omissions and discrepancies which he is 
likely to discover. The probability of the occurrence of error is 
increased in any work when it is accomplished by collaboration. 
But in the present case the chief explanation of omissions and 



vi pheface. 

irregularities is to be found in the lack of cooperation on the part of 
the public. For the earlier history of the town the sources are of 
course documentary, and were therefore at the command of the 
author. For the later history resort must be had to living men, as 
individuals or as official representatives of organizations, and in 
many instances repeated appeals had to be made in order to 
secure a satisfactory statement of essential facts. If the amount of 
correspondence and of personal effort on the part of the compiler 
required to secure the data for some of our chapters could be 
known, it would serve as a revelation in regard to the indifference 
of the great majority to matters of history, and the difficulties that 
beset the local historian. Should omissions, then, be discovered, it 
may be that others than the compiler or the editor are to be blamed 
for them. It may be presumed at all events that omissions are not 
accidental, or the result of the want of a plan, but were allowed for 
some good reason. In the field of manufactures and trade, for 
example, it was found necessary to limit the record to corporations, 
and not to touch upon unincorporated business firms unless inci- 
dentally. There was of course no intention of slighting anybody or 
neglecting any " interest." 

In a work like this, one of the matters difficult to deal with is 
the biographical element. Who among the living or the dead shall be 
selected for biographical treatment? and who shall be omitted? In 
answering these questions it was found impossible to draw a line 
which any two persons could agree upon. It should be said, how- 
ever, that the classification and grouping of biographies under 
different departments naturally led to including persons who might 
otherwise have been omitted, while others, of no less value in the 
eyes of the community and in their influence upon it, were passed 
by. In some cases, in which a formal biography is not given, the 
significant facts of the life are mentioned incidentally, and can 
readily be discovered by help of the index. If some biographies 
seem needlessly long and others too brief, it must be remembered 
that most of the sketches were prepared from materials furnished 
by the persons themselves or by their relatives. A similar remark 
may be made in regard to the genealogical data. The appendix of 
" Family Records " in our first volume must be of the highest value 
from the genealogist's point of view, but our History, nevertheless, 
was not intended to be a genealogy, and makes no claim to be so 
considered. When, however, the names of a second or third gener- 
ation and the birth-dates of male children were furnished, especially 
in families fully identified with Waterbury, we put them on record 
almost as a matter of course. 



PREFACE. vii 

The authorship of our History affords a fine illustration of the 
modern tendency to cooperative work in literature. The original 
plan, which placed the first hundred years in charge of Miss 
Prichard and the second hundred years in charge of Miss Ward, has 
been substantially followed out, although in each volume a group 
of writers is represented. Miss Prichard, in pursuance of her task, 
after years of patient and loving research, contributed to the 
History an elaborate and vivid narrative covering the colonial and 
revolutionary periods, and prepared, in addition, chapters on the 
old highways, on early place-names, on the history of the First 
church and on the church in Salem society. The relation of her 
work to Dr. Bronson's has been already referred to, but it would 
not be easy to set forth the entire newness of the picture she 
has painted, and the amount of well-established detail she has 
introduced into it. As we read her story, the Waterbury of the 
eighteenth century comes back to us, vital with the old colonial 
life and clothed at the same time in that rich and tender coloring 
which the past so naturally takes on at the magic touch of a pen 
like hers. 

From the nature of the case Miss Ward's work was entirely 
different. As already indicated, the sources she had to draw upon 
were living men and existing organizations, and much labor was 
required in securing the cooperation even of those who were them- 
selves subjects of the history. The newspapers of half a century 
had to be searched, an extended correspondence had to be carried 
on and personal interviews held, for the securing of materials, and 
after all this came a task of preliminary editorship, ere these 
materials could be handed over to the writers who were to prepare 
the several narratives. Such work can never secure the recognition 
it deserves, because it is work beneath the surface; but such work as 
this underlies our second and third volumes throughout, and without 
it our history of modern Waterbury could not have come into being. 
Miss Ward's relations to the people of the present time made her a 
representative, to a certain extent, of the business aspects of the 
publication, and in this field also she has exhibited decided ability. 
The numerous illustrations with which the book is adorned have 
been in her charge, and the elaborate index is the fruit of her skill 
in a field in which she is known as an expert. 

Among the collaborators there are two who ought to be specially 
mentioned because of the large amount of work done by them. 
One of these is Miss Katharine Prichard, who prepared with pains- 
taking labor the invaluable appendix containing a transcript, with 
important additions, of the records of the town in relation to births, 



viii PREFACE. 

marriages and deaths. The other is Mr. Kingsbury, who has not 
only written a number of chapters, but has served continually as a 
repository of genealogical and other facts, ever ready to be drawn 
upon and always reliable. The others who have cooperated in the 
production of the several narratives are designated in the table of 
contents prefixed to each volume. A helper who has, perhaps, done 
more for the work than is thus indicated is Benjamin F. Rowland, 
who has assisted Miss Prichard in following out many lines of re- 
search. Another is Professor David G. Porter. Another is Miss 
Mary DeForest Hotchkiss, whose services have been chiefly, but by 
no means exclusively, clerical. The editor takes the liberty of say- 
ing that he regards the men and women who have contributed to 
this History as constituting a corps of workers of exceptional ability 
— some of them filling the position of specialists in the fields in 
which they have labored. 

With so large a variety of authors, it was inevitable that there 
should be considerable diversity of style and treatment, and, as 
already suggested, occasional repetitions and contradictions. The 
diversity of style and treatment is probably an advantage. As for 
contradictions and repetitions, they have been eliminated, so far as 
a laborious editorial revision could accomplish this. The editor is 
not responsible for Miss Prichard's narrative, but only for its place 
in relation to the work as a whole. As for the other chapters, he 
has taken it upon himself to shape them with reference to a certain 
editorial standard, which included such minor matters as punctua- 
tion and capitalization, and the omission of the titles " Mr." and 
" Miss," and of the name of the state after places, when that state 
is Connecticut. It included also, within certain limits, the literary 
form of the chapters. 

That some parts of the History are brought down only to 1894 
and others to the end of 1895 is explained by the fact that the work 
has been going through the press for two years. Many changes 
have taken place in the community in the meantime, the most 
important of which is probably the securing of a new charter for 
the city and the reorganization under it of the municipal depart- 
ments. (As the first volume was printed before the division into 
three volumes was decided upon, some of the references therein to 
Volume n should read "Volume HI.") 

Since this work was first projected, several books and pamphlets 
have appeared, relating to the history of Waterbury. Among these 
are: " Waterbury and Her Industries," published in 1888; "Water- 
bury Illustrated," published by Adt & Brother in 1889; "The Book 
of the Riverside Cemetery," 1889; "Waterbury, its Location, Wealth, 



X PREFACE. 

in midnight hours. If it is not what it ought to be, he hopes that 
these facts may serve to explain deficiencies. Looking back over 
the past four years, he is inclined to appropriate as his own the 
quaint language of Anthony a Wood in the preface to his History 
of Oxford: " A painful work it is, I'll assure you, and more than 
difficult, — wherein what toyle hath been taken, as no man thinketh 
so no man believeth, except he hath made the trial." A "painful 
work," but a work that has had its pleasures; and not the least of 
these has been the close association into which it has brought the 
editor with the other workers in the same field. That it has 
also opened up to him a richer and more detailed knowledge of this 
noble old town, of which he has been a citizen for more than thirty 
years — a town remarkable for its strong men and for its marvel- 
lous development as an industrial centre — is something for which 
he cannot cease to be grateful. 

JOSEPH ANDERSON. 



Waterbury, February 22, 1896. 



PREFACE. ix 

Finances, etc., published by the Board of Trade," 1890; ''The Mili- 
tary History of Waterbury," 1891; "The Churches of Mattatuck," 
1892, and " The History of New Haven County" (Volume II, Chapter 
XV) 1892. It is pleasant to note that all these, except the last, were 
prepared by writers belonging to our corps of collaborators, and 
were not designed to supersede this work or any part of it. 

A fact which ought not to pass without mention here is that sev- 
eral of those who have been engaged upon this work did not live to 
see it completed. Of the writers whose names appear in our table of 
contents four have finished their earthly course since the History 
was begun: Nathan Dikeman, Israel Holmes, 2nd, who died Feb- 
ruary 12, 1895, the Rev. J. H. Duggan, who died November 10, 1895, 
and Thomas S. Collier of New London. The widely-known en- 
graver, Alexander H. Ritchie, by whom most of the steel plate 
portraits in this History were executed, died vSeptember 20, 1895, in 
his seventy-fourth year. He was a native of {Scotland, an artist 
in oil colors, and for twenty-five years a member of the National 
Academy of Design. He had frequently expressed a desire to com- 
plete this series of portraits, upon which he had been at work for 
seven years, and during his last illness had the satisfaction of 
knowing that his hope had been realized. It is to be added that 
George S. Lester, who, as a representative of the publishers, was 
for some time closely connected with the History, and well-known 
in Waterbury, died on April 20, 1893. 

The editor ventures to say a word in conclusion in reference to 
his own work. It was understood at the outset that the three 
gentlemen mentioned in the prospectus should constiti:te a kind of 
editorial board, to whom the various doubtful cjuestions likely to 
arise, as well as the general shaping of the work, should be sub- 
mitted. This position they have not abdicated and their advice 
has continually been sought, but as the work advanced, its editorial 
management devolved more and more upon the undersigned, and 
became by degrees a close supervision, extending not only to the 
general plan and outline but to innumerable details of form and 
arrangement, to say nothing of the composition of entire chapters 
of the narrative. The duty of supervision, which the editor 
thought of in advance as but little else than a pastime, proved for 
various reasons to be a prolonged and laborious task. The plan of 
the History was so extensive, and the standard adopted so high, 
that a much greater burden of labor came upon him than he antici- 
pated when he accepted the position. His professional duties, of 
course, could not be transferred, and this special work must there- 
fore be performed at odd times and during summer vacations and 



CONTENTS OF VOLUME I. 

PAGE 
CHAPTER 

I. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, . . • • • • i 
By Homer F. Basse tt, M. A. 

II. ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS i4 

By the Rev. Joseph Anderson, D. D. Also the three 
following chapters. 

HI. INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES, 26 

IV. INDIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES, 39 

V. STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK, .... 56 
VI. LONDON'S PLANTATION IN MASSACHUSETTS BAY, . 77 
By Miss Sarah J. Prichard. This and the followitig 
chapters to Chapter XXXIV were written by Miss 
Prichard. 
VII. MASSACHUSETTS BAY'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTI- 
CUT 9^ 

VIII. CONNECTICUT'S PLANTATION AT MATTATUCK, . 116 

IX. MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION, 127 

X. MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION, i44 

XL ORDERS OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE, . . .150 

XII. MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION, 158 

XIII. MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION 176 

XIV. THE TOWNSHIP OF 1686 i^S 

XV. WATERBURY IN 1689, "o3 

XVI. FROM 1685 to 1691, ^^5 

XVII. THE FIRST CHURCH OF WATERBURY. . ... .224 

XVIII. MEADOWS, ISLANDS AND HILLS, 237 

XIX. DURING QUEEN ANNE'S WAR, 248 

XX. THE SCOTT FAMILY, . ^5'^ 

XXI. THE COMMON FENCE 264 

XXII. TO THE CLOSE OF THE PROPRIETORS' REIGN, . . 277 

XXIII. THE NEW INHABITANTS, 292 

XXIV. EARLY NORTHBURY, ...•■••• 3ii 



xii CONTENTS OF VOLUME 1. 

CHAPTER 

XXV. EARLY WESTBURY, .... 

XXVI. EVENTS FROM 1732 TO 1741, 

XXVII. THE SETTLEMENT AT JUDD'S MEADOWS, 

XXVIII. LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS, 

XXIX. 1 742- 1 760. ...... 

XXX. WATERBURY IN THE COLONIAL WARS. . 

XXXI. WATERBURY'S LATER YEARS AS A COLONIAL TOWN, 398 

XXXII. WATERBURY IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. . 409 

XXXIII. WATERBURY IN THE REVOLUTION, . 

XXXIV. WATERBURY IN THE REVOLUTION 
XXXV. AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION, 

By Arthtcr Reed Kimball. 
XXXVL LIFE IN THE AGE OF HOMESPUN, 

By Mrs. Emily Goodrich Smith {with additions). 
XXXVII. OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS, 

By Miss Sarah J. Prichard and Bmjavtin K How I and. 
XXXVIII. OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES, 

By the Hon. Frederick J. Kingsbury, LL. D. 
XXXIX. THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIRST ACADEMY, . 
By Miss Charlotte Benedict; the First Academy by the 
late Israel Holmes, 2nd. 

XL. THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1S25; ALSO THE CHURCH IN 
SALEM, ..... 

By Miss S. J. Prichard {pp. 601-616; 640-646) and Dr. 
[oseph Anderson. The biography of Dr. Samuel 
Hopkins by Miss Benedict. 



I'AGE 
342 

353 
366 

383 



433 
445 

4S8 

520 

548 
572 
592 



601 



XLI. THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO 1S30, 
By F. J. Kingsbury, LL. D. 
XLII. BURYING GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS, 

By Miss Katharine Prichard {pp. 666-6S0) and Dr. Joseph 
Andersofi. 



647 



666 



XLIIL ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK, 

By Miss S. J. Prichard and Benjamin F. Ho7vland. 

APPENDIX. FAMILY RECORDS 

By Miss Katharine Prichard. 



■ 685 
pp. 1-166 



PORTRAITS IN THIS VOLUME. 



Anderson, Joseph, 



ON STEEL. 



Frontispiece. 



MISCELLANEOUS. 



Bronson, Alvin, 
Bronson, Josiah, 
Cook, Lemuel, 
Hopkins, Samuel, D. D. 



PAGE 



ILLUSTRATIONS IN THIS VOLUME. 



John Warner's staff, ..... 

Tree in the rock on the old Cheshire road, 

A western war-club, scalp-locks attached, and old Waterbury 
" Scovills & Co. extra," . . . • 

Pestle of Turkey hill Indians, .... 

Indian pipes, ... • • 

Implements found in Naugatuck, . . . • 

Soapstone dish and chipped implements. Hospital bluff, Waterb 

Dish, axes and " Chungke stone," Waterbury, . 

Specimens found near Bunker Hill, 

Pestle and soapstone dish from Watertown, 

Toy implements from a child's grave, 

Articles of agreement and association adopted by the planters 
first page, ....•• 

Articles of agreement; second page. 

Articles of agreement; reverse. 

The old Town Plot, . 

House lots of Mattatuck, 16S1, 

Dr. Henry Bronson's map, . 

The oldest gravestone, 

The Indian deed of February 20, 1684, 

The Three Sisters. aUas the Three Brothers, 

Waterbury township of 1686; view from Malmalick hill. 

Proprietors' book of record, 1677-1722, 

Hop Meadow hill; the sections remaining in iSgi, 

Looking down upon Steel's meadow and plain, . 

Pine meadow, looking southward from Reynolds bridge 

Jericho rock and Buck's Meadow mountain, 

The Rock house . . . • • 



buttons marked 



ury. 



of Mattatu 



PAGE 

xiv 
6 

25 
34 
38 
60 

65 
66 
67 
68 
71 

128 
129 
130 
132 
160 
161 
173 

IC)2 
193 

gS, 199 
216 
241 
242 
243 
'-44 
259 



ILLUSTRATIONS. 



Steel's meadow along the river, 

Map of survey, 171 5, 

Entrance of Beacon Hill brook into the Naugatuck river at the 

House built by the Rev. John Trumbull, 

The valley of " the small river that comes through the straits 

Lebanon," .... 

Fac-simile of invitation to a ball, . 
House built by William Adams, 
Factory of J. M. L. & W. N. Scovill, 1835, 
Third house of worship of the First church, 1796 to 1840 
Fac-simile of receipt given by Andrew Eliot, 
Fac simile of receipt given by Thomas Ruggles, 
St. John's church, 1795, 
Gravestone of Hannah Hopkins, . 
The Porter house at Union Cit^^ 
The house site of Ebenezer Richards, 
The old mill at Greystone, . 
Some autographs of early settlers. 







PAGE 




266 






283 


straits, 




284 
328 


northward of 




343 
538 
562 

574 
614 
624 
625 

657 
668 

715 
717 

718 


I 


68 


Ap. 




JOHN WARNER S STAFF. 
(DEACON JOHN WARNER OF NORTHBURV, BORN 1700, DIED 1795.' 



CHAPTER I. 

THE ANCIENT TOWN ITS BOUNDARIES ITS TOPOGRAPHY ITS STREAMS 

ITS GEOLOGY THE GLACIAL AGE ITS MINERALOGY, BOTANY 

AND ZOOLOGY. 

ANCIENT WATERBURY embraced a territory lying on both 
sides of the Naugatuck river and extending from the point 
where Beacon Hill brook joins that stream, or the southern- 
most limit of the town of Naugatuck, to the northern line of the 
towns of Plymouth and Thomaston, or even further north. The 
length of this tract is not less than sixteen miles and the average 
breadth about eight, and it contains nearly one hundred and thirty 
square miles. Lying near the southern extremity of the Green 
Mountain range, it has a surface consisting of several low, parallel 
ridges, with narrow valleys between, which trend almost without 
exception to the south. The unevenness of the surface produces 
numerous watersheds of limited extent, from which small streams 
find their way to the Naugatuck. Only one of these is called a 
river, and this is hardly more than a good sized brook. So numer- 
ous are these streams that they are supposed to have suggested 
the name given to the territory when it was incorporated as a 
town. 

One of the largest tributaries of the Naugatuck is Lead Mine 
brook, which takes its name from a hill in the town of Harwinton, 
where a mine of black lead was supposed to exist. This stream 
enters the Naugatuck a short distance south of the present northern 
line of Plymouth, but there are good reasons for believing that the 
original boundary was further north and that Lead Mine hill was 
within the limits of ancient Waterbury. Northfield branch enters 
the Naugatuck, from the west, at the village of Thomaston. A 
mile south of this, at Reynolds Bridge, West branch, which rises 
in the town of Morris, flows into the river, also from the west. Tt 
is generally called ''the Branch." The next tributary is Hancock 
brook, which unites with the main stream at Waterville. It drains 
a long, narrow valley, east of, and nearly parallel with, the Nau- 
gatuck. vSteele's brook, whose watershed embraces the eastern and 
northern parts of Watertown, enters the Naugatuck from the west 
about half way between Waterville and Waterbury. The largest 



2 - HISTORY OF WATERS UEY. 

and most important branch of the main stream, within the limits of 
the ancient territory, is Mad river. This stream has its source in 
Cedar swamp, which lies partly in the town of Bristol and partly 
in Wolcott, and was so named when it was covered with a heavy 
growth of white cedars. A dam of very moderate height, across the 
outlet, has converted it into a large reservoir, and its waters are 
used by the factories along the stream. Mad river, on its way to the 
Naugatuck, receives several tributaries. The largest of these are 
Lily brook, Lindley brook and Chestnut Hill brook. They furnish 
a large quantity of most excellent water, and are considered of 
great importance to Waterbury as the probable source of a future 
water supply. A small stream known as Smug's brook enters the 
Naugatuck from the east, at Hopeville, and a larger one, called 
Fulling-mill brook, at Union City. The next two tributaries are 
from the west. The first, Hop brook, joins the river between 
Union City and Naugatuck, and the other. Long Meadow brook, at 
the lower end of Naugatuck village. Beacon Hill brook, the south- 
ernmost tributary within the limits of our territory, is historically 
interesting as the ancient boundary between Waterbury and Derby. 
It unites with the Naugatuck just where the hills converge to form 
the gorge below the village of Naugatuck. It is thought that 
during the glacial period this gorge was closed by ice or other 
obstructions, and that a lake occupied the valley for many miles 
above. 

The Naugatuck itself is formed by the union of two streams 
which come together at Torrington. The eastern branch rises in 
the town of Winchester and flows nearly south ; the western rises 
in Norfolk and flows southeasterly. Besides the streams we have 
mentioned there are numerous unnamed brooks which, after a 
brief course, fall into the main river. All the streams are fed 
largely by springs of pure water and were, in earlier times, the 
trout fisher's paradise. 

There are no lakes in this territory, although Quassapaug is at 
one point only " eighty rods " from the line that bounded ancient 
Waterbury on the west. Neither are there any large swamps. 
There are many small ones and not a few pools and temporary 
lakelets that disappear in the dry season. These are formed in the 
slight depressions in the underlying mica - slate and, as many of 
them have no visible inlet or outlet and are slowly filling up with 
vegetable and other matter falling into them, they make a sort of 
rude gauge by which we may roughly estimate the length of time 
that has elapsed since these basins were formed. Some of them 
are filled with peat moss, and attempts have been made to use 



PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. 3 

the peaty deposits for fuel, but with unsatisfactory results. A few 
have been drained and reclaimed and are now productive lands.* 

One very important feature of this region remains to be noticed. 
It is the alluvial deposits along the Naugatuck river and some of 
its branches. At the time of its settlement by the whites these 
were natural m.eadows. They were not peculiar to these streams, 
but it was their existence here that led the settlers to choose this 
territory. They are of limited area, and the fertility of the soil 
caused the natives to destroy the forests which covered them, if 
such ever existed. 

The geological history of Waterbury is short but interesting. 
All that the surface reveals, even to the eye of the geologist, is the 
existence of the same mica-slate and semi-crystalline rock that 
forms the foundation of the entire Green Mountain range, a super- 
ficial deposit of drift and the insignificant alluvial deposit already 
referred to. The two formations first named, though in contact 
are widely separated in time, but how widely geologists do not tell 
us, as the age or relative place of the Green Mountain mica-slate is 
a question on which they fail to agree. All admit that it is one of 
the oldest of the stratified rocks, but whether it antedates organic 
life on the planet, or is among the earliest of the formations that 
bear traces of life is not definitely settled. At some time in the 
history of the strata, either before they had become hardened, or if 
later when they had been made plastic through the agency of heat 
they appear to have been subjected to a lateral pressure so intense 
that they were curved, crinkled and twisted into the strange forms 
they now present. Later, when they had reached their present 
solid condition, they were, by the same internal force, raised up, 
tilted, broken and, in parts, completely overturned as we see them 
to-day. Striking illustrations of the tilting of vast ledges of these 
rocks can be seen on the west side of the Naugatuck river at 
Hinchliffe's bridge. The effects of lateral pressure on a large 
scale can be seen in the gorge below the old clock factory at 
Hoadley's station on the New York and New England Railroad. 
Veins of granite occur in many places. They are supposed to have 
been forced up through rifts in the slate rock from underlying 
molten masses. Some of these veins are of such extent and the 
granite is of so fine a quality that they are worked as quarries. 
The best quarries thus far opened are near the Naugatuck, one at 



* The names attached to many of the hills, valleys, streams, and swamps are commemorative of persons 
or events, and such localities as Spindle hill, Buck's hill, Breakneck hill, Withington hill, Woodtick. Mill 
plain and Wooster swamp are chiefly interesting in connection with the circumstances which gave them 
name. They are located and described in the history which follows. 



4 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Rattlesnake hill, the other a mile above Reynolds bridge and 
known as Plymouth quarry. 

It is evidently a long time, even as geologists measure time, 
since changes of position or serious disturbances of any sort have 
taken place in the rocks that form the Green Mountain range. 
How much they have been chang-ed on the surface by the slow 
action of the elements, how often, through repeated subsidences 
and upheavals of the crust of the earth, they had been submerged 
in ancient seas and raised again above their surface before the ice 
age began, can never be known. Some conception of the length of 
time that elapsed between the completion of the mica-slate forma- 
tion and the beginning of the ice age can be gained from the fact 
that at least fifty distinct formations were begun and finished 
within that period. The possibility that some of these were 
contemporaneous is admitted, but the relative position of most of 
them is such that this could have been the case in only a few 
instances. Standing, as one may in many places on our hills, with 
one foot on the ancient slate rock and the other on the drift that 
partially covers it, one becomes a sort of Colossus of time, and the 
immensity of the period thus spanned quite overpowers the mind. 

It is probable that much of the rounding and polishing of the 
boulders, pebbles and gravel which constitute so large a portion of 
the drift, was done by water before the glacial era began. The ice 
in its course took up this material, but deposited much of it 
unchanged. Long ago, as we reckon time, but quite recently, if 
we reckon by geologic eras, seas washed the base of the Green 
Mountain range and sandstone deposits of considerable extent were 
formed. In these, remains of animal and vegetable life are found 
which show that the higher forms of both lived on the land in 
great numbers and for a long period. But, if they lived within the 
limits of the territory we are describing, all traces of them have 
disappeared. 

The loose, unstratified deposit of clay, sand, gravel, cobble- 
stones and boulders that covers nearly all the northern part of 
North America is known as "drift." It is a heterogeneous mass 
of material that has been transported by some means from places 
often hundreds of miles away, and always from points northward 
of its present location. The study of glaciers as they exist to-day 
in various parts of the world shows that the drift, whatever the 
history of the parts of which it is composed may be, has come into 
its present position through glacial agencies. So well are these 
agencies now understood that an explanation of most of the feat- 
ures presented by the drift in this region is not difhcult. 



1 

J 

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. 5 

The ice age was formerly looked upon as a completed period in 
the geological history of the earth, but it is no longer so considered. 
It may be nearing its close, for ice fields cover far less territory 
than they covered in the past, or it may be that the recession of 
the glaciers to higher altitudes and polar latitudes is only tem- 
porary, and that they will, sometime, reoccupy their former limits. 
Evidence is accumulating which shows that the advance and 
retreat of the ice fields occurred once or more than once before. 
Vast regions in the polar zones are covered with ice, and glaciers 
fill the higher valleys in many mountain ranges in the temperate 
zones, and in the aggregate millions of square miles are to - day 
undergoing a grinding and smoothing process precisely like that 
which smoothed and polished our hills of mica-slate. The study of 
existing glaciers shows them to be moving bodies and recent 
observations on some of the Alaskan ice fields prove that their 
velocity varies from a few inches to more than sixty feet in a day. 
Without stopping to consider the cause of this motion, it is 
sufficient for our purpose to say that the moving fields of ice trans- 
ported innumerable boulders far from their original beds (leav- 
ing them in many instances on the summits of high mountains), 
formed kames, drumlins and kettle holes,* and on melting left the 
general deposit of clay, sand, gravel and loose rocks that covers all 
our hills and valleys. At almost any point where the removal of 
the drift has laid the rocks bare, grooves and striae can be seen that 
were made by the slow but resistless movement of the ice and the 
sand and the fragments of rock imbedded in it. They are parallel 
and can often be traced for a long distance. Their direction in 
this region is a few degrees east of south. It is an interesting fact 
that, although their course is rarely, if ever, deflected to the right 
or left by any obstacle, they follow vertically every elevation and 
depression except the most abrupt. This was explained when it 
was found that glacial ice is not the rigid solid it seems to be, 
but yields under its own weight to all the inequalities of surface 
beneath it. It would be easy to show that this pressure must mani- 
fest itself vertically and not laterally. On all our hills of slate 
rock the easy acclivities are almost invariably on the northern 
side, and the cliffs, where such exist, are as constantly found on 

* A " drum " or " drumlin " is defined as a long narrow ridge or mound of sand, gravel and boulders; a 
name given by Irish geologists to elevations of this kind, believed to have been the result of glacial agencies. 
A " kame " is a peculiar elongated ridge made up of detrital material. A " kettle-moraine '" is an accumula- 
tion of detrital material with kettle-like depressions. These depressions are called kettle-holes. (A fine 
example of this sort is the north Spectacle pond on the Meriden road near Silver street.) The chief differ- 
ence between drumlins and kames is in the arrangement of the materials composing them and the time of 
their formation, the kames being of more recent date. It is only in the kames that the kettle-holes are met with. 

The explanation here given of these terms seems called for, as they have but recently appeared in 
geological writings. 



HISTOBY OF WATERS Unr. 



the southern or southeastern side. This shows not only that the 
denuding- force which smoothed the hills came from the north and 
expended its energy against the rocky obstacles in its course, but 
that, being a semi-fluid, it did not accommodate itself to sudden 
and abrupt changes of level as readily as a fluid would have done. 
Boulders are found everywhere. They belong to various geological 
formations, but always to such as inay be found at some point 
further north. This inay be near at hand or hundreds of miles 
away. Some are rounded as if water worn in pre-glacial seas. 
Others are angular as if they had been subjected to little more 
than the ordinary action of the elements. Their situation often 
indicates very clearly the means by which their removal was 
effected. They are as often found stranded on the highest points 
of our hills as in the vales below — left there when the sea of ice 
melted away. One of the largest of these stray rocks, in this re- 



gion, stands 
southeast of 
ton Hitch- 
Waterbury 
judge from 
mineralogi- 
a great way 
from its ori- 
ginal bed. 
vSo nicely 
balanced 
are some of 
these bould- 
e r s that 
they can be 
moved by 
the hand. These 
are called rocking 
stones. A remark- 
able boulder is seen 
on the old Cheshire 
road, near the resi- 
dence of John Mix It 
is above the ordmai \ 
size, and out of a nit 
on its highest point 
a large and wide 
spreading white oak 
tree has grown. 



a little distance to the 
the residence of Shel- 
cock, on the road from 
to vSouthington, and, to 
its angularity and its 
cal character, it is not 




TREE IN THE ROCK ON THE OLD CHESHIRE K( 



PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. -j 

During the last thirty years several hills within the city have 
been leveled. Others, especially along the line of the railroads 
below the city, are fast disappearing. Very few remain intact. 
Their removal has afforded to those interested an excellent oppor- 
tunity for studying their structure. They are composed of sand, 
gravel and boulders, and are unquestionably of glacial origin. So 
also are the similar deposits that skirt the hillsides along the 
Naugatuck and its principal branches. The peculiar arrangement 
of the material composing them is not easily accounted for. It is 
not stratified, in the sense in which that term is usually understood, 
nor is it without a kind of stratification. Sorted, expresses best the 
arrangement of the sand, clay, gravel and boulders. The hills have 
usually a linear arrangement in the line of the glacial movement, 
and in this locality they are always found where some valley, large 
or small, opens out into a plain. South of West Main street two 
parallel ranges of hills exist; the range nearest the river consisting 
of material brought down the Steele Brook valley, and the other 
and much longer one, of material brought down the Naugatuck 
valley. Each of the brooklets that flow from the north through 
the city has its hill of drift, or terminal moraine, as they were 
formerly called, at the point where the stream enters, or formerly 
entered, the plain. The moraine of Little Brook valley was the 
hill (now removed) that extended from where Dr. Alfred North's 
residence stands to the fountain at the east end of the green. 
Spencer hill and the hill on which the High School building 
stands, mark the termination of Great Brook valley. The entrance 
of Carrington Brook into Mad River valley is marked by an exten- 
sive deposit of drift of the same general character as the others we 
have named, and similar examples may be seen in many other places. 

As already rem^arked, the transportation of earth and boulders 
by glaciers is going on in many parts of the world to-day, but I 
do not find that any observer has satisfactorily explained the pro- 
cess by which the different materials in our hills were sorted and 
deposited. A careful study of their structure, based on observa- 
tions made while some of them were being removed, has led to the 
belief that they were formed near the close of the ice period, not 
by river currents but in temporary lakes. The closing of the 
gorge (already referred to) below Naugatuck would have resulted 
in the formation of a lake where AVaterbury now stands, deeper 
than the height of the highest drift hills in this region. Admitting 
the existence of such a lake, we may suppose that the field of 
glacial ice extended over its entire surface, and that glacial rivers 
carried earthy materials across the ice. A deposit must, of course, 



8 HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 

have been formed at the termination of the ice field, the same as if 
it were on the land, and, as by irregular stages the ice retreated, a 
line of hills would have been left. The sorting- would depend upon 
the volume and strength of the currents of water flowing over the 
surface of the ice, and these would vary with the seasons and from 
various other causes. The structure of the hills is just what it 
would be if a feeble current bearing clay or sand for a time, till a 
hillock of such materials was formed, had been succeeded by a 
flood strong enough to bear along the heavier matter that had been 
left behind. The advance or retreat of the ice field even for a few 
feet, or any variations in the course of the currents, would change 
the place of the deposits, and bring about just such an arrangement 
as we actually find. This explanation accounts for the limited area 
covered by the several deposits and their great, relative thickness; 
also for the varying inclinations they present. As a rule they dip 
to the north or in the direction from which the material must have 
come, but it is not rare to find the inclination towards other points 
of the compass, and occasionally a deposit caps the cone-like hill, 
falling down to the base on every side. How far the features here 
described are local I am unable to say, but there are, in several 
geological works, cuts showing sections of drift hills in various 
localities, and in some of them the structure is apparently the same 
as in our hills. 

One other feature of these hills is to be noted. Over the entire 
surface of most, and perhaps all of them, there is a thin layer of 
drift, rarely more than one or two feet in thickness, which differs 
from the layers beneath it in that the sand, gravel and boulders 
of which it is composed are intimately mixed and without any 
stratification whatever. As river currents capable of moving this 
material would have demolished the hills themselves, it is probable 
that it was formed from detritus from floating ice after the glacier 
had retreated to the northern shores of the lake. 

On the road from Waterbury to Meriden, not far from Silver 
street, there were a few years ago two deep holes, partly filled with 
mud and water, known as the Spectacle ponds. One of them still 
remains, but the other has been drained by the removal of the 
bank of drift which separated it from Mad river, and the peat has 
been carried away. They are very near together, there being only 
a narrow roadway between them, and their small diameter, circular 
outline and great comparative depth suggest the name of kettle 
holes, which is now generally given to similar depressions every- 
where. The kettle hole on the north side of the road does not 
exceed three hundred feet in diameter at the top and its depth is 



PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. 9 

between thirty and forty feet if we include the water and mud 
which fill the bottom. The steep bank is composed of drift, but a 
ledge of rocks approaches very near to it on the northern side. 
The kettle holes were, for a long time, a puzzle to geologists, but it 
is now generally believed that they mark places where detached 
masses of ice of moderate extent but of great thickness were sur- 
rounded by and covered over with drift at the close of the ice 
period. As the ice melted, the debris on the surface would fall 
outward from the middle, and when all was gone a kettle hole 
would remain. This explanation does not militate against the 
theory that a lake covered this region at the time these were 
formed, for beds of ice of immense thickness are often covered 
with drift to the depth of many feet and of sufficient weight to 
strand the whole mass. Few regions illustrate better than ours the 
principal features of the ice age. 

No rich deposits of the metals have ever been found within the 
limits of ancient Waterbury. It is said that traces of gold and 
silver exist in several places, and indications of copper are not 
rare, but the efforts that have been made at mining for these 
metals have not been successful. Early explorers of the region 
reported the discovery of graphite, and samples of the mineral 
seem to have been carried away, but the location of the mine, if 
there was one, was lost and has never been re-discovered. There are 
traces of graphite in our mica slate in many places, but nowhere in 
such quantity as could be called a black lead mine.* 

A list of the trees and plants growing in Waterbury at the time 
of its first settlement would be interesting as showing how many 
of the native plants have become extinct. No such list exists, and 
there are very few references in ancient records to particular 
species even of the useful forest trees. Sometimes a particular 
species is mentioned as marking a boundary, but that is all. The 
original forests have been cut down and, though there are more 
acres of woodland than there were even thirty years ago, the trees 
are everywhere of recent growth. Probably the chestnut (Castanea 

* As remarked in the description of the geological features of this region, the country is dotted all over 
with boulders, and it is plain that these came from places north of where they now lie. Now it is well 
known that graphite is abundant at Hinsdale, Mass., at Brandon, Vt., at Ticonderoga on the west shore 
of Lake Champlain, and at many places north of the Naugatuck valley. Is it not quite probable that a 
boulder containmg graphite from some of these places was found on Lead Mine hill, and that the small 
quantity thus secured was taken as an indication of a large deposit ? There is a boulder on a hillside half 
a mile south of Bristol, Conn., that contains a small amount of pure graphite. This rock must have come 
from a long distance to the north, as there are no other rocks of the same kind in that vicinity. A limestone 
boulder containing a vein of sulphate of strontia, was found a few years ago in the drift overlying the clay 
slate at Middleburg, Ohio, although the nearest locality where strontia is found in place is on Strontian 
island in Lake Erie, nearlv one hundred miles from where the boulder lies. 



lo HISTORY OF WATER BURT. 

vesca) was then as now the most abundant species. This, with the 
white pine (Pinus strobus), the sugar maple (Acer saccharinum) 
and four or five of the eight or nine species of oak found here, 
formed the greater and more valuable part of the forests. Two 
species that were sparingly found here thirty years ago have since 
become extinct, — the black spruce (Abies nigra) and the paper or 
canoe birch (Betula papyracea). The former once grew in the 
swamp south of the Middlebury road, and the latter was found in 
several deep ravines. One species, the common locust (Robinia 
pseudacacia), has become naturalized in a few places. 

Inasmuch as complete catalogues of the plants of this state, or 
of special districts, are easily accessible to botanists, it is quite 
unnecessary to attempt a full list here. What follows relates 
mostly to plants that are believed to be extinct or are becoming so, 
and to others that are interesting because of their habits, their 
beauty or their rarity, although not, perhaps, rare in other places. 

Hepatica (Hepatica triloba), is becoming rare, being much 
sought after for its beautiful and very early flowers. Gold thread 
(Coptis trifolia), a plant in some repute for its medicinal properties, 
and abundant a few years ago in the vicinity of Waterbury, has 
become rare through the clearing up of its habitat — boggy swamps 
and wet thickets. The tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), the 
whitewood of the western states, is occasionally met with, but the 
finest specimens are dwarfs beside the majestic trees of this species 
found in the west and south. Canadian moonseed (Menispermum 
Canadense), never common here, seems to have entirely disap- 
peared. The May apple or mandrake (Podophyllum peltatum) 
grew not many years ago, within a limited area, a short distance 
above Waterville. Sarracenia purpurea, best known as the pitcher 
plant or the side-saddle flower, was once very abundant in the peat 
swamp south of the Middlebury road, but disappeared when the 
fire overran the bog a few years ago. It is doubtful whether it can 
now be found within our limits, though very plentiful in localities 
not distant. 

The climbing fumitory (Adlumia cirrhosa), often cultivated for 
festoons and bowers, was for several years common along the 
rocky banks of Hancock brook, above Waterville. The pale 
corydalis (Corydalis glauca) is sometimes met with on the bare 
summits of the hills, where it finds root in the seams and rifts of 
the rocks. We have ten or twelve species of the wild violet. The 
round-leaved (Viola rotundifolia) is the rarest of these, being found 
here only in cool, springy places. It is abundant further north, 
and this is its extreme southern limit, unless it be met with in the 



PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. ii 

Alleghany Mountains. The violet wood-sorrel (Oxalis violacea), 
often cultivated, grew wild for a time on the hillside near the resi- 
dence of Wallace H. Camp. Rhus typhina, the stag- horn sumach, 
is rare in this region, a few specimens being found in the rocky 
valley of Hancock brook, below Hoadley's station. The bladder nut 
(Staphylea trifolia) grows at the base of the hill in the meadow west 
of the Waterbury Brass Company's mill, and in a. few other places. 

The striped maple (Acer Pennsylvanicum) and the mountain 
maple (A. spicatum) are found in the ravine at the foot of Eagle 
rock, near Reynolds Bridge. The fringed polygala (Polygala 
paucifolia) sometimes called flowering wintergreen, is one of the 
most beautiful of our early spring flowers. It is not a rare plant, 
but is always a puzzle to young botanists. The prickly pear 
(Opuntia vulgaris) is common on the summit of Beacon Hill, just 
south of the line of ancient Waterbury, but does not, so far as I 
know, occur within our limits. The bristly sarsaparilla or wild 
elder (Aralia hispida) is found in the ravine between Waterville 
and Hoadley's station. It is very abundant further north on the 
Green Mountains. Four other species of this genus are found here. 
Flowering dogwood (Cornus florida) is met with in all parts of our 
territory and is quite abundant on ihe hills west of Thomaston. 
The dwarf cornel (Cornus Canadensis) grows in a swamp half a 
mile northwest of the Spindle Hill school-house in Wolcott. It is 
very common on the hills further north. The cranberry tree 
(Viburnum opulus) was found, a few years ago, on the hill west of 
the Waterbury Brass Company's mill, and the hobble-bush (V. 
lantanoides) grows in the ravine at Reynolds Bridge. The com- 
mon May-weed (Maruta Cotula), introduced from Europe, was 
formerly one of the most common weeds seen by the roadside. A 
few years ago it almost disappeared from this region, and for 
several seasons could scarcely be found. Lately it has reappeared, 
but is still rare. 

The ox-eye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare), that beautiful foreign 
pest which some have named as the national floral emblem, is so 
common that when it is in blossom in June, our hills are as white 
as if covered with snow. The creeping snowberry (Chiogenes 
hispidula) was quite abundant in Cedar Swamp before that was 
made a I'eservoir; but it is doubtful whether it can be found within 
our limits. The trailing arbutus (Epigea repens), once common, 
has almost disappeared through the ravages of Mayflower hunters, 
who take it root and branch, flowers or no flowers, wherever they 
can find it. Jamestown weed (Datura stramonium), not rare thirty 
years ago, is rarely if ever seen now. The fringed gentian 



12 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

(Gentiana crinita) is rather common, but is certain to share the fate 
of the arbutus, as its very pretty flowers are just scarce enough to 
be sought after. The five-flowered gentian (G. quinqueflora) occurs 
in Litchfield and in Bristol, and should be found in Plymouth and 
Thomaston. A thrifty patch of buckbean (Alenyanthes trifolia) 
was found, a few years ago, by J. G. Jones (who has detected several 
rare plants in this region), in a muddy pool, beside Chestnut Hill 
brook, in Wolcott. It has since disappeared. Wild ginger (Asarum 
Canadense) was once common along the banks of Hancock brook, 
above Waterville. 

A tree that, w^hether cultivated for shade or growing wild, 
exceeds all others in luxuriance, is the American or white elm 
(Ulmus Americana). It flourishes everywhere, on high lands and 
on low, in wet and dry soils alike. Its winged seeds take root and 
grow in every thicket, in cultivated fields, in gardens and even 
between the paving stones of gutters and sidewalks. It is a 
favorite shade tree throughout New England, and it thrives 
nowhere better than in the Naugatuck valley. The slippery elm 
(U. fulva) is rather rare, and seldom reaches a large size in this 
region. The hop (Humulus lupulus), introduced from Europe, 
grows spontaneously along the Naugatuck river. The family of 
oaks is represented by the following species : Quercus alba, Q. 
montana, Q. bicolor, Q. prinoides, Q. ilicifolia, Q. tinctoria, Q. 
coccinea, Q. rubra, and Q. palustris. The pine family is represented 
by the pitch pine (Pinus rigida) and the white pine (P. strobus). 
The latter seems to have been abundant here in early times and 
to have furnished much valuable timber. The hemlock and the 
black spruce grew here. The former is now quite rare and the 
latter exists only as a shade tree around old homesteads. The 
tamarack or black larch (Larix Americana), once common, is now 
nearly extinct. The white cedar (Cupressus thyoides) was once 
abundant in Cedar swamp, and a few scattering trees of small size 
still grow on the borders of the reservoir which occupies its place; 
but it is not, so far as I know, found within our limits. 

The Indian turnip (Arisaema triphyllum) is very common, but 
the dragon root (A. dracontium) is rare. It was growing, a few 
years ago, along the Naugatuck, just below the Watertown railroad 
bridge and, in a gully now filled up, near the New England station 
in Waterbury. The water arum (Calla palustris) grows in Wolcott, 
in a swamp northwest from the Spindle Hill school-house, also in a 
swamp near the Middlebury road. Three species of lady's slipper 
(Cypripedium pubescens, C. parviflorum, C. acaule) occur in this 
territory. C. acaule is quite common, the others are very rare. At 



PHYSICAL CRARACTERISTICS. 



13 



least twenty-five species of ferns are found in this region. One 
species, the walking-leaf fern (Camptosorus rhizophyllus), has dis- 
appeared from the only locality where I have found it growing. 
This was in Watertown, near Nonnewaug river, almost due west 
from the Watertown fair grounds. 

In nothing else does the subjugation of a wilderness by man 
work such change as in its zoology. The larger wild animals are 
killed or driven away, and domesticated species, either useful or 
otherwise, take their places. The smaller animals change their 
haunts and to some extent their habits. Waterfowl desert the 
lakes and rivers, and other game birds become scarce and shy, and, 
though a few species of small birds may increase in numbers, most 
of them grow scarcer and some disappear, and the birds of prey 
follow the kinds they subsist upon. Fish are taken to an extent 
that exceeds their increase, and their homes are poisoned by 
sewage or closed by obstructions, till they die out, or they are only 
saved from extinction by a re-stocking of their haunts. Reptiles, 
from their habits, are less affected than other orders, but these 
also suffer through the reclamation of waste places and the war 
of extermination that is ever waged against the noxious kinds. 
Among the lower orders, especially among insects, these changes 
mean the destruction of many of the original tribes and the intro- 
duction of others. 

We have no complete lists of the animals living here at the time 
of the first settlement of the country, but we know that many 
changes have taken place. Bears, deer and wolves, once common, 
are no longer found. Wild geese and ducks and other waterfowl, 
though formerly here in countless numbers, are rarely if ever seen 
on the ponds and running streams, and grouse and quail would 
long ago have become extinct had not the law given them protec- 
tion. The streams, poisoned by factories, are destitute of fish, and 
it is only in the small spring brooks among the hills that the trout 
now finds refuge. Civilization and cultivation mean extermination 
to the aborigines, whether wild animals or wild men. All give 
way to civilized man, for not his " rights " but his ambition and 
selfishness " are paramount," and they have " no rights that he is 
bound to respect." In enlightened man the cruel instincts of the 
savage have not yet died out, and he gloats over his more perfect 
devices for destroying helpless creatures that while living are 
harmless, and when dead are of no value to him. 



CHAPTER II. 

Aboriginal jNIattatuck — The Indian Race —The Alcionkian Stock 
IN New England — Indians of Connecticut River, of Long 
Island Sound — Mattatuck claimed by both — Aboriginal 
Life — The Tribe and the "Gens" — Tribal Ownership of 
Land — Employments — Useful Arts — Implements of Stone — 
Language — Character. 

THE history of Waterbury begins with its settlement by white 
men. But there are certain well known or ascertainable 
facts concerning its condition previous to the earliest visits 
of Europeans which some readers will expect to find included in 
the narrative, and which for the sake of completeness ought to be 
put on record. These facts relate not onh' to the topography, the 
geology and the natural history of the region formerl}^ called ]\lat- 
tatuck, but to its aboriginal inhabitants. 

These inhabitants belonged, of course, to the American Indian 
race. It is possible that the Naugatuck valley was at some far off 
time — say during the last glacial period — occupied by a prehistoric 
people, represented, as some think, by the Eskimos of the present 
day. But in the absence of any remains which can be positively 
assigned to such a people, it is unneccessary to take this possibility 
into account. The only inhabitants with whom we need concern 
ourselves are the Indians of whom the first settlers purchased the 
territory and their predecessors.* 

At the time of the discovery of America, and at the settlement of 
Connecticut a hundred and fifty years later, the entire North 
American continent was overspread by a people constituting quite 
certainly a single race. With the possible exception of the Eskimos, 
they possessed physical and linguistic peculiarities which differ- 
enced them from other races of men and set them apart as a people 
by themselves. At the same time this widely extended race was 
divided into distinct stocks or peoples, separated from one another 
not only by geographical position but by the possession of totally 
distinct languages. There are those who, like Roger Williams in 
his " Key," speak of " the language of America " as if there were 

* Chipped implements have been found in the gravel of the Delaware river, at Trenton, N. J., which from 
their position must apparently be assigned to a glacial era. (See Abbott's "Primitive Industry," chapter 
xxxiii.) But no great antiquity can be claimed for any remains thus far discovered in the Naugatuck valley. 



ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS. 15 

only one American Indian language, apparently ignorant of the 
fact that the Indian languages are numbered by hundreds, if not 
thousands. But, as in other parts of the world, these languages are 
not all distinct from one another, nor is the relationship between 
one and another in all cases the same. vSome are as closely related 
as vSpanish and Portuguese are, others as remotely as English and 
Welsh, and others are as completely separated from one another as 
are Greek and Hebrew. As in Europe and Asia there is an Aryan 
family of languages descended with all their diversities from a 
common parent language, and a Semitic family descended from ai.- 
other common parent, so is it with the languages of America. They 
exist in larger or smaller groups, each group entirely distinct from 
the others, and each consisting of several languages having a com- 
mon parentage, and characterized by certain close affinities. There 
is, for example, an Iroquois group, numbering seven or eight lan- 
guages, a Dakota group, numbering eighteen, a Shoshonee group, 
numbering thirty-two languages and dialects, and an Algonkin 
group nimibering seventeen. The seven or eight members of the 
Iroquois group are evidently sister tongues, possessing to a large 
extent a common vocabulary and other common characteristics; 
the same is true of the seventeen members of the Algonkin group. 
But between the Mohawk language of the Iroquois group, and the 
Mohegan language of the Algonkin group, although the two ex- 
isted for a long time side by side, there was no more relationship 
than between English and Hungarian. There was a certain resem- 
blance between them in structure, but between their respective 
vocabularies, that is, between the stock of words used by a Mohawk 
and the stock of words used by a Mohegan, no resemblance or rela- 
tionship can be discovered. 

It may not be strictly scientific to divide off and classify the 
peoples speaking these various languages according to the group- 
ing which the languages suggest, but it is very natural to do so, 
and is not likely to be seriously misleading. While therefore we 
speak of the American race as one, we speak of it as divided into 
" races " or peoples. Of all these, the Algonkians — that is, the tribes 
speaking the various languages of the Algonkin stock — were geo- 
graphically the most widely distributed. They extended " from 
Labrador to the Rocky Mountains, and from the Churchill River of 
Hudson Bay to Pamlico Sound in North Carolina."* Some of these 
— for example, the Crees, Chippeways and Delawares — were numer- 
ous and were spread over wide regions. But in the territory now 
known as New England the population was broken up into compar- 

* J. C. Filling's " Bibliography of the Algonquian Languages," p. iii. 



1 6 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

atively small divisions,— the various tribes or bands speaking 
closely related languages, or dialects of the same language. In 
Southern New England the tribes best known to us were the Mas- 
sachusetts, the Nipmucks, the Narragansetts and the Mohegans, to 
whom the Pequots were closely related.* 

Taking our position on the western bank of the Connecticut, say 
at Hartford, we find ourselves in the midst of an Algonkian people 
extending for some distance up and down the river, divided into 
tribes or bands, and perhaps loosely organized into a kind of con 
federacy. We can not accurately define the nature or extent of 
their organization, but we learn from the records of the time that 
at the first coming of the English a certain sachem named Sequas- 
sen sold land to them extending as far west as the country of the 
hostile Mohawks. The tribe of which Sequassen was a sachem 
must have included the Indians of the Farmington river, some of 
whom had their principal seat at Poquonnock, a dozen miles to the 
north of Hartford, and others at the bend in the river, eight or ten 
miles to the west, where Farmington was afterward settled. From 
this bend in the Farmington river, or from the name of the place 
at which the bend occurs, these Indians were called the Tunxis. f 
In Barber's "Connecticut Historical Collections" they are spoken 
of as "numerous and warlike," but Mr. J. W. DeForest in his 
" History of the Indians of Connecticut " estimates their number 
at "eighty to one hundred warriors, or about four hundred indi- 
viduals." The first Poquonnock chief known to the English was 
Sehat, who was succeeded by Nesaheagun, whose name has been 
perpetuated in that of the first Waterbury lodge of Odd Fellows. J 
The Farmington Indians had a camping-ground at Simsbury also, 
some miles west of Poquonnock, and claimed ownership of the 
lands west of there, as far as the Housatonic river. All the ter- 
ritory comprised within the original bounds of Mattatuck was 
included in their claim. 



*By some writers the name Mohegan is used to designate all the Indians between the Narragansetts and 
the Hudson river. " The MuJihekaneciv or Stockbridge Indians, as well as the tribe at New London, are by 
the Anglo-Americans called Mohegans. . . . This language is spoken by all the Indians throughout New- 
England. Every tribe, as that of Stockbridge, that of Farmington, that of New London, has a different dia- 
lect; but the language is radically the same. Mr. Eliot's translation of the Bible is in a particular dialect of 
this language." P. s of Dr. Jonathan Edwards's " Observations on the Language of the Muhhekaneew 
Indians. New Haven, 1788." 

+ " The locality to which the name originally belonged was the ' bow ' or ' turning ' of the river, where ' it 
bends' (-wiit-tniikshaii) from a southeasterly to a northerly course." Dr. J. H. Trumbull's " Indian Names 
of Places," p. 74. 

The name " Tunxis " survives in the designation of a " tribe" or lodge of the " Order of Red Men," in 
Waterbury. 

*The old-fashioned e of the early scribes having been mistaken, as it often is, for an c, the name has been 
transformed into "Nosahogan." 



ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS. 17 

Leaving the centre of the state and going southward to the 
shore of Long Island sotind, we enter the country of the Quiripi 
Indians, who were known around New Haven harbor as the Quin- 
nipiacs. Their territory extended from the Connecticut river to 
the western bounds of the state. To the west of the New Haven 
Indians was another Quiripi tribe or band claiming ownership on 
both sides of the Housatonic. Their territory extended from West 
river (which flows between New Haven and Orange), or at any rate 
from Oyster river (which flows between Orange and Milford), all 
the way to Fairfield. Those who lived to the east of the Housa- 
tonic, whose chief seat was near the mouth of the Wepowaug (or 
Milford) river, were known as Wepowaugs; those to the west and 
north were called Paugasetts or Paugasucks.* 

On the west of the Housatonic the Paugasucks claimed the terri- 
tory now comprised in the towns of Stratford, Bridgeport, Trum- 
bull, Huntington and Monroe, and on the east of that river lands 
extending northward beyond Beacon Hill brook, including what 
lies between the Housatonic and the Naugatuck, and embracing the 
Mattatuck bounds. Although their well-known sachem Ansanta- 
way f is said to have had his wigwam on Charles Island, the chief seat 
of the Paugasucks was at the mouth of the Naugatuck. On the 
tongue of land between the two rivers, about three-fourths of a 
mile above their junction and close to the Housatonic bank, they 
had a kind of fortress to which they were accustomed to resort in 
times of danger. 

It appears, then, that at the date of the settlement of Mattatuck, 
the country lying to the east and northeast of it was occupied by 
an Algonkian tribe, having for its natural eastern boundary the Con- 
necticut river, and claiming jurisdiction far to the west, while the 
country lying to the south was occupied by another Algonkian 
tribe, having for its natural southern boundary Long Island sound, 
and claiming jurisdiction far to the north. Mattatuck itself — as 
any one may see by a glance at the map of Connecticut — lay at the 
intersection or overlapping of the two claims, and was the common 
meeting-ground of both tribes. If the tribes had been hostile 
rather than friendly, the meeting-ground would have been a 
battle-ground; but not only was there a good understanding 

* In the records of New Haven colony, the name appears as Paugasset ; in the records of the Connecticut 
colony, Paugasuck. It designated the lands " by Derby ferry and about Derby neck," and was superseded 
by the English name Derby by vote of the General Court in May, 1675. It denotes, according to Dr. Trum- 
bull (" Indian names," p. 46) "a place at which a strait widens, where the narrows open out," and is descrip- 
tive of the junction of the Housatonic and Naugatuck rivers. The name was applied, naturally enough, to 
the Indians who had their chief seat there. 

+ Like Nesaheagun, his name is perpetuated in that of an Odd Fellows' organization in Waterbury — the 
Ansantawae Encampment. 



i8 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

between them, there are indications in the various deeds of land 
signed by their representatives, that some of them were inter- 
related. 

At the time of their first contact with Europeans, the American 
Indians in different regions were found in different stages of devel- 
opment. Those of Central America, Mexico and New Mexico lived 
in villages (pueblos) and depended almost entirel}^ on horticulture 
for subsistence. There were other tribes that did not cultivate the 
ground, but depended entirely upon fish, game and bread-roots. 
Between these two extremes there were tribes which combined both 
these modes of life in different degrees. They depended partly on 
horticulture for subsistence, but could not be considered village 
Indians. To this class belonged the Indians of the Atlantic coast, 
including those of Connecticut. They had their established camp- 
ing-grounds, but they were a roving people. This was true of those 
from wiiom the territory of Waterbury was purchased. The Farm- 
ington river Indians had their camping-grounds at Poquonnock, 
Farmington and vSimsbury, and the Paugasucks at the mouth of the 
Naugatuck. But we must not think of them as dwelling perma- 
nently at these places, but rather as frequenting the entire region 
which they claimed as their own, establishing a temporary camp 
now at one place and now at another, according to the season of the 
year and the opportunities afforded for hunting and fishing,— an 
annual visit to the salt water being a matter of course even with 
those who lived at a considerable distance from it.* Dr. Bronson 
says:f "It is believed that at the time of its discovery no Indian 
settlement existed within the limits of ancient Waterbury." Even 
if this was the case, it does not follow that the region was not occu- 



* " They remove house upon these occasions :From thick warm valleys, where they winter, they remove 
a little nearer to their summer fields. When 'tis warm spring, then they remove to their iields where they 
plant corn. In middle of summer, because of the abundance of fleas, which the dust of the house breeds, 
they will fly and remove on a sudden from one part of their field to a fresh place. And sometimes, having 
fields a mile or two or many miles asunder, when the work of one field is over, they remove house to another. 
If death fall in amongst them, they presently remove to a fresh place ; if an enemy approach, they remove 
into a thicket or swamp, unless they have some fort to remove unto. Sometimes they remove to a hunting- 
house in the end of the year, and forsake it not until snow lie thick, and they will travel home, men, women 
and children, through the snow, thirty, yea fifty or sixty miles. But their great remove is from their sum- 
mer fields to warm and thick woody bottoms where they winter. They are quick ; in half a day. yea, some- 
times at few hours' warning to be gone, and the house up elsewhere, especially if they have stakes ready 
pitched for their mats, t once in travel lodged at a house, at which in my return I hoped to have lodged 
again there the next night ; but the house was gone in that interim, and I was glad to lodge under a tree." 
(Roger Williams's " Key,'" pp. 46, 47.) 

" Towns they have none, being always removing from one place to another for conveniency of food, some- 
times to those places where one sort of -fish is most plentiful, other whiles where others are. I have seen half 
a hundred of their wigwams together in a piece of ground, and they show prettily; within a day or two, or a 
week, they have been all dispersed. They live for the most part by the seaside, especially in the spring and 
summer quarters ; in winter they are gone up into the country to hunt deer and beaver." (John Josselyn's 
^'Account of Two Voyages to New England, made during the years 1638, 1663," p 09 of reprint.) 

+ " History of Waterbury," p. 2. 



ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS. 



19 



pied, in the way already indicated. As we shall see (in the follow- 
ing chapter), there are remains which go to show either that it was 
more widely occupied than we are wont to suppose, or else that the 
period of its occupancy extended over hundreds, if not thousands, 
of years. 

"What kind of people were these aboriginal inhabitants of Mat- 
tatuck ? The ordinary reader doubtless believes that he has a toler- 
ably correct conception of them — although his views may be derived 
from newspaper estimates of the present-day Indians of the west- 
ern plains. But concerning the essential facts of aboriginal life 
and character most of us are thoroughly ignorant. This is not the 
place for elaborate dissertation or minute descrii^tion; but there 
are important facts — some of them bearing directly upon the trans- 
fer of the territory from barbarian to civilized hands — which ought 
to be placed on record in such a history as this. 

Among the Indians as first known to Europeans a tribal organ- 
ization was universal. Whatever classification into groups or lin- 
guistic families may be suggested by a study of their languages, we 
must not fail to recognize their division into tribes, each tribe 
claiming possession of a territory of its own, having a name of its 
own, and distinguished by a special dialect, the result of its separa- 
tion in area from others s^Deaking the same mother language. It is 
not generall}^ known, but it is a well established fact, that within 
the limits of every tribe was another organization— perhaps we 
should say, an " institution " — which has received the name of clan 
or gens. The gens is a very ancient form of social organization, 
which can be traced in nearly all parts of the globe among savage 
and barbarous peoples, and which existed in full development 
among the American aborigines at the time of the discovery. A 
gens consisted originally of a group of persons related by ties of 
kindred, who "traced their descent from a common female ancestor 
through females, the evidence of the fact being their possession of a 
common gentilic name. It included this ancestor and her children, 
the children of her daughters, and the children of her female 
descendants, through females, in perpetuity; while the children of 
her sons, and the children of her male descendants through males, 
would belong to other gciitcs, namely, those of their respective 
mothers."* Every tribe, therefore contained at least two gentes, 
while in some tribes the number had increased by subdivision to 
more than twenty. Each gens was distinguished by its name and 
totem (usually the name of some animal or bird) ; its members pos- 
sessed certain rights in common and were bound together by cer- 

* L. H. Morgan's "Ancient Society,'' pp. 67, 68. 



20 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

tain mutual obligations, the most important of which was the obli- 
gation not to marry in the gens. It was to the gens, and not to the 
tribe, that the right belonged of electing sachems and chiefs. The 
office of sachem (whose duties were confined to affairs of peace) was 
hereditary in the gens, that is, it was filled by election as often as a 
vacancy occurred; other chiefs were elected in recognition of per- 
sonal bravery, wisdom or eloquence. In these elections all adult 
persons, both men and women, had a right to take part, so that the 
organization was on a purely democratic basis. The gens held the 
right also of deposing those whom it had elected, so that the term 
of office was practically " during good behavior." It ought to be 
added that the office of sachem, in order to remain within the gens 
(the line of descent being on the female side), must pass from 
brother to brother or from uncle to nephew, never from father to 
son. Property also was hereditary in the gens, and under a similar 
law. 

There is good evidence that these forms of organization — the 
tribal and the gentilic — existed ainong the Indians of Connecticut 
no less than among the other aborigines of America. We have 
already pointed out certain lines of tribal division and centres of 
tribal life. There is no doubt (in view of modern investigations) 
that through these various tribes the existence of three ancient 
gentes (the Wolf, the Turtle and the Turkey), which belonged to 
the Indians of Connecticut in common with the Delawares dwelling- 
further to the south, could have been traced, and that these had in 
the course of centuries been subdivided until they numbered 
eleven, each having its special name. Among the modern descend- 
ants of the Mohegans the division into eleven gentes still exists.* 

A fact of more importance (not intrinsically, but in order to a 
correct understanding of the relations of the aborigines to the 
first settlers) pertains to the ownership of property. Among people 
in the "lower status of barbarism," the amount of personal property 
is always small. It consists of one's personal effects, together with 
possessory rights in garden-beds, and, among some tribes, in joint- 
tenement houses. Among the Indians, the ownership of these was 
hereditary in the gens. But, except among the Aztecs, who had 
advanced somewhat further than the northern tribes, the owner- 
ship of lands inhered not in the gens but in the tribe. The condi- 
tion of things existing among the Cherokees and other tribes of 
the Indian Territory to-day, was universal among the aborigines — 
namely, tribal ownership of land and no ownership in severalty. 
The territory of a tribe '' consisted of the area of their actual 

*" Ancient Society," pp. 173, 174, 100. 



ABOlilGTNAL INHABITANTS. 21 

settlements and so mncli of the surrounding region as the tribe 
ranged over in hunting and fishing, and was able to defend against 
the encroachments of other tribes." Outside of this area was a 
margin of neutral ground, separating the tribe from other tribes, 
and claimed by neither. When the neighboring tribe spoke a 
different language, this neutral area was likely to be broad; when 
they spoke dialects of the same language, it was narrower and less 
clearly marked.* The fact that there were no definite boundary 
lines may serve to explain the rival claims of different bands 
which the settlers of Mattatuck had to recognize, involving repeated 
purchases by them of the same territory. 

The kind of life which the aboriginal occupants lived may be 
partly inferred from what has been said in regard to their means of 
subsistence. Their chief dependence was upon fishing and hunting, 
which were the sole employments of the men; the cultivation of 
the ground was left entirely to women. Whatever pertained to 
in-door life — the wigwam with all its belongings — was under the 
care of the women; the men, when not occupied in the chase, or 
engaged in war, lived a life of leisure, diversified by the manufac- 
ture of bows, arrows, axes and pipes. f 

It must be remembered that these people belonged to what has 
been termed the stone age, and had not emerged from the lower 
level of barbarism. They knew nothing of iron, and almost noth- 
ing of copper. But the number of things which they could do, 
without metals of any kind, is greater than any one would imagine 
who had not made a special investigation of the matter. They 
possessed the art of striking fire; they made bows and arrows 
— the boAvstrings of sinew, the arrow-heads of stone or bone; they 
manufactured various other stone weapons and implements (some 

*" Ancient Societ)-," p. 112. 

+ Roger Williams, in his "Key," says that the men " commonly get and fix the long poles, and then the 
women cover the house with mats, and line them with embroidered mats which the women make,— which 
amongst them make as fair a show as hangings with us " (p. 32, first edition.) He says in the same chapter : 
" Their women constantly beat all their corn with hand " in their pounding mortar ; " they plant it, dress it, 
gather it, barn it, and take as much pains as any people in the world. . . . It is almost incredible what 
burthens the poor women carry of corn, of fish, of beans, of mats, and a child beside." " Generally all the 
men throughout the country have a tobacco-bag, with a pipe in it, hanging at their back. Sometimes they 
make such great pipes, both of wood and stone, that they are two foot long, with men or beasts carved, so 
big or massy that a man may be hurt mortally by one of them ; but these commonly come from the Maii- 
guauzuogs [Mohawks], or the men eaters, three or four hundred miles from us" (pp. 37, 38, 44, 45.) 

Wood, in his " New England's Prospect," says that the women in their care of the cornfield," e.Nceed our 
English husbandmen, keeping it so clear with their clam-shell hoes, as if it were a garden rather than a 
cornfield, not suffering a choking weed to advance his audacious head above their infant corn, or an under- 
mining worm to spoil his spurns." He adds that " in winter-time they are their husbands' caterers, . . . 
and their porters to lug home their venison, which their laziness exposes to the wolves till they impose it 
upon their wives' shoulders." " They are often troubled, like snails, to carry their houses on their backs, 
sometimes to fishing-places, other times to hunting-places, after that to a planting place, where it abides the 
longest" (part 2, chapters 10, 20.) 



2 2 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

of them chipped, others ground), such as axes, hammers, chisels, 
knives, drills, fish-spears, net sinkers, mortars, pestles, pots, pipes, 
ceremonial and ornamental objects, and implements for use in 
athletic games. They made vessels of clay mixed with sand and 
hardened by fire. They had learned how to cure and tan skins, 
and of these made moccasins, leggins and other wearing apparel. 
They made nets and twine and rope from filaments of bark, and 
wove the same material into belts, sashes and burden straps. They 
made baskets of osier, or cane, or splints; canoes of birch bark or 
skins, or dug-out logs, and houses of poles covered with skins. 
They had also invented musical instruments, such as the flute and 
the drum. They cultivated maize, beans, scjuashes and tobacco, and 
made unleavened bread of pounded maize boiled in earthern ves- 
sels.* Of the various objects manufactured by the aborigines of 
Connecticut only those made of stone have escaped the tooth of time, 
with the exception of a few specimens of pottery, most of them 
fragmentary. The stone implements, however — especially the 
small implements made by chipping — are numerous, and are valu- 
able as indicating the kind of life which the primitive man lived 
and the various places occupied by him in the course of centuries. 
Within the bounds of ancient Mattatuck, as everywhere else in 
America, we can trace the red men by the stone "relics" they have 
left behind them. We can see them moving from place to place, 
establishing their camping-ground now on the river-bank, now by 
the brook-side, now on some commanding bluff, and again at some 
perennial spring. The arrow-maker's hut had its place in each 
camp, and the chips which he made still testify, in many a quiet 
spot, to his industry and skill, f That there were well-worn paths 
across the tribal territory, made by these roving bands in the 
course of centuries, is altogether probable, and it is also probable 
that some of the roads of the present day follow the trails of our 
aboriginal predecessors. To what extent during their long occu- 
pancy they had carried the task of clearing the land of forests, it is 
impossible to say. Perhaps they had done more in this direction — 
especially at certain tribal centres — than they usually receive credit 
for. 

Our outline would be very imperfect, did we make no reference 
to the language of these aborigines. As already indicated, the dia- 
lects spoken on the Connecticut and on Long Island sound, were 
dialects of an Algonkin language common to all the tribes between 
the Kennebec river and the Hudson. This language has been pre- 

* L. H. Morgan, " North American Review," October, 1868; " Ancient Society," pp. 60, 70. 
•)• Compare Abbott's " Primitive Industry," pp. 455-459. 



ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS. 



23 



served to the present clay in Jolm Eliot's Indian Bible and other 
translations, in Roger Williams's " Key into the Language of 
America," and in Abraham Pierson's ■' vSome Helps for the Indians." 
The work by Pierson, who was the father of the first rector of Yale 
College, is " a catechism in the language of the Quiripi Indians," 
and represents "a dialect having a place between the dialects of 
Massachusetts, Narragansett and eastern Connecticut, and those of 
the middle states; showing nearer affinity than other New Eng- 
land dialects to the true Delaware or Renapi of New Sweden." * 

This is the dialect which was spoken by the Patigasucks of the 
Naugatuck river, who claimed ownership of the lands to the north, 
including the territory of Mattatuck, and must have differed some- 
what from that spoken by the Farmington Indians. The nature of 
the differences between the dialects is indicated by Roger Williams 
in his " Key," under the \NOY&ann/ii, meaning " a dog." He says: " The 
variety of their dialects and proper speech within thirty or forty 
miles each of other is very great," and illustrates this by the differ- 
ent forms of this word. In the Cowesit dialect it is aninn, in the 
Nipmuck alum, in the Narragansett ayiin, and in the Ouinnipiac 
arum. " So that," he adds, "although some pronounce not / nor /-, yet 
it is the most proper dialect of other jDlaces, contrary to many 
reports."! Eliot in his "Indian Grammar Begun" refers to the 
same variations: "We Massachusetts pronounce the //, the Nip- 
muck Indians pronounce /, and the Northern Indians pronounce ;v" 
and we have a further instance in the different forms of the name 
by which the Indians of southwestern Connecticut are designated. 
" Quinnipiac {ijuinni-pe-auke) means ' long-water land ' or country. . 
. . In the Mohegan and Narragansett dialects the first syllable was 
pronounced quin, by the Connecticut river Indians quil, and by the 
Indians west of the 'long water' quir." % vSimilar dialectic peculiari- 
ties can be traced in the names signed to the deeds given to the set- 
tlers of Mattatuck by the Paugasuck Indians, who were undoubt- 
edly Quiripis, when compared with the names of the Indians of 
Farmington river. Of the dialect actually spoken in the Naugatuck 
valley, a few words have been preserved by Mr. J. W. DeForest, in 
the appendix to his " History of the Indians of Connecticut." In 
this brief list the same dialectic differences can be traced. For ex- 
ample, the word for "man," which in the Narragansett was /;/////, was 
in the Naugatuck dialect rinh; the word for " fire," which in the 
Massachusetts was noota'h and in the Narragansett note ox yote, was in 

*Dr. J. H. TruinbuU's reprint of Pierson (Hartford, 1873), P- 'i- 

+ " Key," p. 107. 

X Dr. J. H. Trumbull's " Indian Names," p. 61. 



24 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

the Naugatiick ?-uuhtah. The other Naugatuck words are, we/ii/i, 
woman, kccsoop, day, toofku, night, niippeh, water, tookh, tree, azvausitso, 
bear, and scp/e, river, — for each of which a corresponding word, 
closely resembling it, may be found in the related dialects. * 

The language of which this was one of the dialects has been 
carefully studied in modern times by DuPonceau, Pickering, Dr. J. 
Hammond Trumbull, and others; its structure has been examined 
and its grammatical characteristics have been placed on record. Its 
peculiarities can not be here explained, but it may be worth while 
to mention that in its structure it was "polysynthetic," like all the 
Algonkin languages (perhaps we may say, all the aboriginal lan- 
guages of North America); that its vocabulary, contrary to the pop- 
ular impression, was abundant rather than scanty, and that it was 
as completely subject to strict grammatical laws as the languages 
of the civilized world. Any one who fancies that the aboriginal 
occupants of Mattatuck were poorly furnished with means of inter- 
communication by speech, or had to make use of a rude and form- 
less dialect, would do well to examine the paradigms of the verb in 
Eliot's grammar, or the vocabularies in Williams's " Key," or the 
questions and answers in Pierson's catechism. A close study of 
these remains of an extinct speech would inevitably result in height- 
ening the respect of the student for the mental characteristics of 
the people upon whose lips, in the course of ages, it developed into 
a symmetrical, copious and expressive language. 

Of the Tunxis and Paugasi:ck Indians, as they were at the time 
of the settlement of Mattatuck — their numbers, their condition as a 
people — we have little or no information, except that which may be 
drawn from the deeds by which they conveyed their lands to the 
settlers, the signatures attached to those deeds and the very slight 
personal allusions connected therewith, or found in the colonial 
records. We have no description of these people from the pen of 
any early traveller, nor record of them in any journal of trader 
or missionary. Any one threading his way through the elaborate 
metaphysical definitions of the catechism prepared for the Quiripi 
Indians in 1658 would be jiistified in inferring that the Quiripis, 

* The following is the Quiripi version of the first three petitions of the Lord's prayer, as given in Pier- 
son's catechism (p. 50 of the reprint), with Dr. Trumbull's literal translation into English. The translation 
is here made interlinear, to indicate the order of the words in the Indian rendering. 
" Noushin ausequamulc terre, 

" Our-Father the-place-of-light in, 
Werrettepantammunatch kowesewunk. 

Let-it-be-well-regarded thy-name. 
Peamoutch' kukkussootummowunk. 

Let-it-come-hither thy-great-rulership. 
Knrantammowunk neratch sket' okke nenar ausequamuk terre." . 

Thy-thinking be-it-so on-the-face-of earth even-as the-place-of-iiglit m." Mi 



ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS. 



25 



and therefore the Paugasucks, must have been a people of great 
intellectual ability. But the more correct inference would be that 
the devout Pierson had sadl}' misconceived the method to be 
employed in evangelizing a barbarous and ignorant race. There is 
nothing to indicate that the Indians of Mattatuck differed in any 
important respect from the other aborigines of New England with 
whom the early writers have made us acquainted. They had the 
virtues and the defects of other barbarous peoples. If their virtues 
were not developed, certain it is that new vices were superadded, 
as the result of their contact with Europeans. But this is not to 
be wondered at. When we consider the red man's nature and dis- 
position, the stage of development he had reached and the severe 
ordeal involved in his being brought suddenly in contact with an 
aggressive civilization, his conduct in this trying period of his his- 
tory seems upon the whole worthy of high commendation. How- 
ever cruel and bloodthirsty he may have been by nature, it is cer- 
tain that in his intercourse with peaceable white men he was peace- 
able; if they showed themselves friendly, he was their faithful and 
useful friend.* 



*The gradual xvithdrawal and disappea.an.:e of ihe Paugasuck and Timxis Indians before the advance of 
the white man has been traced by the author of this chapter in two lectures deHvered in Waterbury, January 
27 and February 17, 187Q, and published in the " Waterbury American" (weekly edition) of February 7 and 
March 7. These lectures were afterward embodied in the " Indian History" prefixed to Orcutt's " History 
of Derby." 




_J 



WESTERN WAR-CLUB, SCALI'-LOCKS ATTACHED, AND OLD WATERBURY 
BUTTONS MARKED " SCOVILLS & CO. EXTRA." 



CHAPTER III. 

ABORIGINAL REMAINS INDIAN DEEDS LAND SALE OF 1658 THE 

THREE DEEDS GIVEN BY THE FARMINGTON TRIBE DEED GIVEN BY 

THE DERBY INDIANS — PERSONAL NAMES ATTACHED TO THE SEV- 
ERAL DEEDS RELATIONSHIPS INDICATED BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS 

AND BETWEEN TRIBES. 

OF the aboriginal occupants of Mattatuck the traces that remain 
are of three kinds: First, the deeds which record the transfer 
of their lands to the early settlers; secondly, the Indian place- 
names which under forms more or less disguised have survived in the 
tow^n records or in tradition, and some of which are in common use at 
the present day; and thirdly, the stone implements scattered over the 
region, many of which have been found and have passed into the 
hands of collectors. What follows is an attempt to describe these 
several kinds of remains. 

The author of "Good News from New England," writing of 
Indian customs, says: " Every sachem knoweth how far the bounds 
and limits of his own country extendeth; and that is his own proper 

inheritance In this circuit whosoever hunteth, if they 

kill any venison, bring him his fee." It was natural for Europeans 
familiar with the institutions of feudalism and royalty, to suppose 
that among the barbarous tribes found occupying the new world 
government was monarchical, as among themselves. To them a 
sachem was a petty king, the people of the tribe were his subjects, 
and the tribal territory was, as in the passage just quoted, "his own 
proper inheritance." But if this was true at all, it was only in the 
narrowest sense. The territory belonged to the sachem simply as 
the official representative of his people. An Indian tribe was a 
democracy; the sachemship was an elective office, and the lands 
belonged no more to the sachem than to the others. They belonged 
to the tribe. The true state of the case — however the early settlers 
may have misunderstood it — comes to view in the large number of 
Indian names usually attached to an Indian deed. The list may not 
in any case have included all the adult males of the tribe, but as a 
rule the tribe was well represented, and the sachem's name seldom, 
if ever, stood alone. The settlers had no real-estate transactions 
with individual Indians, and on the other hand they did not allow 

ividual white men — in Connecticut, at any rate — to buy of the 



INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES. 



27 



Indians, either directly or indirectly, land or timber " or candle- 
wood or trees of any sort or kind," without authority from the Gen- 
eral Court.* The first purchase of land within the limits of Matta- 
tuck with reference to a settlement was made by a committee of the 
General Court in behalf of the settlers, and subsec[uent purchases 
were made through a committee appointed by the settlers them- 
selves, or rather, by a company known as the " proprietors of Mat- 
tatuck." 

The Indian deeds relating- to the transfer of Waterbury terri- 
tory from the aboriginal owners to white men are six in number. 
The earliest of these antedates by seventeen years the first regular 
purchase with reference to a plantation at Mattatuck. It appears 
that two of the inhabitants of Farmington, Stanley and Andrews 
by name, in their excursions westward had somewhere discovered 
a deposit of graphite, or something which they mistook for that 
valuable mineral. f Their discovery attracted some attention and 
doubtless led to what appears to have been the first purchase of 
land lying within the Naugatuck valley. In the curious deed that 
relates to it, dated February 8, 1657 (O. S.), and recorded in the town 
records of Farmington, the purchase is described as " a parcel or 
tract of land called Matetacoke yWattatuckokt'], that is to say, the 
hill from whence John vStanley and John Andrev\^s brought the 
black lead, and all the land within eight mile of that hill on every 
side," — making a circular area, sixteen miles in diameter. The pur- 
chasers were William Lewis and Samuel Steele of Farmington, and 
the grantors were Kepacpiam, Oueromus and Mataneg. It appears 
from a deed of 17 14, relating to the same tract of land, that a con- 
siderable part of it was " comprised within the bounds of Water- 
bury." But such were the terms of the grant, and such was the 
action of the General Court in the final disposal of the territory, 
that this earliest purchase need not be further considered here. J 
When, on August 11, 17 14, this same tract was conveyed anew to 
Stanley, Lewis and their associates and successors, the deed was 
signed by Pethuzo and Toxcronuck, who claimed to be the succes- 
sors of Kepaquam, Queromus and Mattaneag, and in October fol- 
lowing it was signed by four other Indians, Taphow the younger 
and his squaw, Awowas (or Wowowis) and Petasas, a female grand- 

*See Colonial Records of Connecticut, Vol. I, p. 214 ; New Haven Colony Records, Vol. II, pp. 593,594- 
There are cases on record like this, under date of May 12, 1670 : " This Court grants liberty to Lieutenant 
Samuel Steele to purchase of Xesahegen one acre of land in Farmington meadow." (Conn. Col. Records, 
Vol. Ill, p. 29.) 

+ See Chapter I, p. 9, and note. 

t The history of this tract, which was for some time a bone of contention in the colony, is given in some 
detail in the lecture entitled " Footprints of the Red Man in the Naugatuck Valley," referred to on p. 25. 



2 8 HISTORY OF WATEEBURY. 

child, probably of Awowas. Some of these names we shall refer 
to subsequently. 

Of the four deeds obtained by the proprietors of Mattatuck from 
the aboriginal owners, the first is dated August 26, 1674. It con- 
veyed a tract of land lying on both sides of the Mattatuck river, 
measuring ten miles from north to south, and six miles in breadth. 
The second deed was given ten years later— April 29, 1684 — and 
nearly doubled the area of the town by the addition of a tract lying 
on the north of the previous purchase. The third deed, given 
December 2, of the same year, refers to the purchase made by the 
committee of the General Court in 1674, and in consideration of 
nine pounds received from the agents of the proprietors, conveys 
certain lands additional. These three deeds were given by the 
Tunxis or Farmington Indians; the fourth, dated February 20, 1685, 
was given by the Paugasuck or Derby Indians, and conveyed 
twenty parcels of land, designated in the deed by their Indian 
names, probably most of them comprised in the first and third 
purchases from the Farmington tribe. A sufficient explanation of 
these purchases of the same territory from two different tribes 
within the space of three months, is afforded by what has been said 
with regard to the limits of tribal territory and the conflict of 
claims concerning the "neutral area." 

Of two of these deeds — that of December 2, 1684 and that of 
February 20, 1685 — the original autographs were discovered in 1890, 
bearing the names of the aboriginal proprietors (representatives of 
their tribes), and over against their names their respective "marks," 
made with their own clumsy fingers. Copies of these deeds and 
of the other two are preserved in the Waterbury Land Records, 
and they bring before us the red man at his point of closest 
approach to us. In the light of these interesting documents we see 
him standing for a little while upon the threshold of our history, 
and then turning away to vanish into darkness.* 

It is not our object just now, to set forth the relations of these 
deeds, or of the purchases which they represent, to the settlement 
of Mattatuck; but rather to obtain from an examination of the 
names attached to them, and from any slight hints they contain, as 
definite a conception as possible of the Indians from whom the 
lands were purchased, who may with some propriety be considered 
the aboriginal occupants of Waterbury. In a deed given by the Farm- 
ington tribe to the town of Farmington, May 22, 1673, we read, " These 
are the names of the Indians that are now present, the day and year 

* The four deeds are recorded in Vol. II. of the Land Records, pp. 224-231, but not in chronological 
order. 



INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES. 



29 



aforesaid." At the several sales of Mattatuck territory the red men 
and their squaws were doubtless present — assembled at some one 
place — and if the modern photographer could only have been stand- 
ing near with his camera we should now have representations of 
the aboriginal grantors which would enable us to estimate them 
more correctly. But we have only their names and some few indi- 
cations of their relations to one another, and there are reasons why 
the names of persons and of relationships should both be mislead- 
ing. The place-names which have come to us from the red man 
were so constructed that they can be analyzed and interpreted; with 
their personal names the case is different. Even if we could trans- 
late them into English, as we do the names of the modern Indians 
of the west, they would probably be to us without significance; and 
as regards relationships, their mode of designating them was so 
different from ours that even the commonest terms were liable to 
be misunderstood. In the system of consanguinity which prevailed 
among our aboriginal predecessors (and which prevails to-day 
throughout the American race)* a man called his sister's children 
nephews and nieces (as with us), and they called him uncle; but his 
brother's children he called sons and daughters, and they called 
him father. A woman called her brother's children nephews and 
nieces (as with us), but she called her sister's children sons and 
daughters, and they called her mother. My father's sister's chil- 
dren and my mother's brother's children are my cousins; but my 
father's brother's children and my mother's sister's children are my 
brothers and sisters. And these designations represent an elabo- 
rate scheme, no part of which corresponds closely to our own. It is 
obvious, therefore, that if in the several deeds not only the names 
but the relationships of the grantors were invariably given (as they 
are in some instances), this would not greatly aid us in reconstruct- 
ing the aboriginal tribe or band; we should still have only a list of 
names before us. 

But notwithstanding the scantiness of our material, it may be 
worth while to see what we can do with it. 

Unfolding before us the first of these Indian deeds — that of 
August 26, 1674— we find that the persons designated as the "own- 
ers and proprietors " of the " tract of land called by the name of 
Mattatuck " are fourteen in number, and bear the following names: 
Nesaheagin, John Compound, Queramouch, Spinning Squaw, Tap- 
how, Chere, Aupkt, Caranchaquo, Patucko, Atumtucko, James, 
Uncowate, Nenapush Squaw, Allwaush. The order in which the 

* See L. H. Morgan's " Systems of Consanguinity and Afifinity of the Human Family,'' Smitiisonian 
Contributions to Knowledge, Vol. XVII ; " Ancient Sitciety," pp. 435-452. 



3° 



HISTORY OF WATERS UEY. 



names are here given is that which is followed in the body of the 
deed; the order in which the grantors affixed their marks to the 
original document may have been different, and we find among the 
signatures the statement that " Patucko promises for James," from 
which it is natural to infer that James was not present with the 
others. Among the witnesses is mentioned " Robin, the Indian." 

In the second deed, — given nearly ten years later, that is, April 29, 
1684, and relating to the northern purchase — three of these names 
appear again, namely, Patucko, who signs " in the name and behalf 
and by order of Atumtucko," and Taphow. To these may probably 
be added AUwaush, although somewhat disguised under the form of 
Wawowus. These are the four that come first in order, and follow- 
ing these we have Judas, Mantow, Momantow's Squaw, and Mary or 
Mercy, who is described as vSepus's Squaw,* — making eight in all. 
Among the signatures we find the additional name of Quatowque- 
chuck, Taphow's son, with the statement that " though Taphow's 
son's name is not in the deed above, yet he doth agree to the sale 
with the rest, this 30th of April, 1684." Among the witnesses to 
this deed is named " Momantow, Indian," whose squaw is mentioned 
among the grantors, and who must therefore be distinguished from 
Mantow, also one of the grantors. These persons are described in 
the body of the deed as " Indians now belonging to Farmington." 

In the third deed, the original autograph of which is preserved 
— that of December 2, 1684 — the names of John a Compowne, Man- 
tow, Atumtucko and Spinning Squaw reappear, and' in addition to 
these we have Worun Compowne, and instead of Patucko, Patucko's 
Squaw, who is designated Atumtucko's mother (which, however, 
may mean his aunt), and, second in the list, a new name, Hachatow- 
suck. The name Sebocket, which appears among the signatures 
under the form of Abuckt or Abucket, is probably the same which 
occurs in the first deed as Aupkt. The names given in the body of 
this third deed are seven in number; among the additional signa 
tures at the end are "James's daughter, by Cockoeson's sister," " also 
Cockoeson's sister's davighter, as also Abuck." We learn from 
another memorandum that Cockoeson's sister was "Patucko's 
squaw," and that Warun Compowne was " Nesaheg's son," perhaps 
his nephew. 

Counting the several distinct names that appear in the three 
deeds given by Farmington Indians, we find that they number 
twenty-five. Mr. J. W. De Forest has been quoted as assigning to 
the Farmington tribe a population of " eighty to one hundred war- 

* Sepus's name is preserved in Waterbury (but in incorrect form) in Sequeses Council, Degree of I'oca- 
hontas, of the " Improved Order of Red Men." 



INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES. 



31 



riors, or about four hundred persons." But Mr. De Forest frankly 
confesses * that his estimate is " based upon nothing," and in all 
probability it is too large. There must have been at this time a 
good many Farmington Indians besides these; in the deed already 
referred to, given to the town of Farmington in 1673, the following- 
names are found in addition to those already enumerated: Nona- 
wau, Onkawont, Skerawagh, Wauno, Seacut, Wonkes, Aslanaugh, 
Wasamock, Cochemhoote and Nocimamon. The number of signers 
on that occasion, including two sons of James and several squaws, 
was twenty-five. But the tendency of the latest investigators is 
to the belief that our estimates of the Indian population have 
hitherto been entirely too high, and sympathizing with this view 
we venture the opinion that the twenty-five men and women who 
signed the jNIattatuck deeds constituted a fair representation of the 
Farmington tribe. If we are to distinguish in any way between 
the signers of the deeds and others who did not sign, we may sup- 
pose that the signers (excepting, of course, the sachem and perhaps 
members of his family) belonged to a band that had from time 
to time occupied a camping ground within Mattatuck bounds and 
thus secured a special claim to the territory. 

Examining the names themselves, what do we find ? John Jos- 
selyn, in his " Two Voyages to New England," f says that the Indi- 
ans " covet much to be called after our English manner, Robin, 
Harry, Philip, and the like." In each of these deeds we find this 
preference illustrated. Among the names mentioned in the first 
are included (besides the witness, Robin) a John and a James; in 
the second we find a Judas and a Mary or Mercy, and in the third 
John appears again. The first deed mentions also a Chere (written 
afterward Chery), which may possibly stand for Cherry, and in 
both the first and the third deed Spinning Squaw holds a prominent 
place. We may readily believe that the English proper names were 
attached to the Indians who bore them in a hap-hazard way; biit 
the designation "Spinning Squaw" invites inquiry. Is it to 
aboriginal spinning (making thread from filaments of bark) that 
reference is made ? or had this woman learned to spin from her 
white neighbors of Farmington, and become so devoted to that kind 
of work that it gave her a name ? It is interesting to learn that this 
woman's name became connected at an early day with a locality in 
the northern part of the town. The purchase described in the deed 
of April 29, 1684, is spoken of as having upon its southern boundary 

* " History of the Indians of Connecticut," p. 52. 

+ " An Account of Two Voyages to New England, Made during the Years 1638, 1663. By John Josselyu, 
Gent.;" reprint of 1S65, p. 100. 



^2 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

" that which was formerly Spinning Squaw's land;" in other words, 
her land was at the northern end of the purchase of 1674. But how 
this case of individual ownership came to pass (if such it was) there 
is nothing to indicate. 

Of the Indian names in the deed of 1674, the first in order, and 
doubtless the first in im^Dortance, is Nesaheagun. The name is 
spelled in a variety of ways, and seems to be identical with Neesou- 
weegun, a name found attached to an agreement with the towns- 
men of New London in 1651.* But the bearer of the name (known 
also as Daniel) could scarcely have been the same person. Nesahea- 
gun seems to have been the successor, and. in accordance with 
Indian law, the nephew of Sehat (Seocut ?) who was the first sachem 
of the Farmington tribe with whom the English became acquainted. 
Nesaheagun is spoken of as "sachem of Poquonnock in Windsor," 
and about the year 1666 sold a tract of land measuring twenty-eight 
thousand acres to certain agents of that town. His name does not 
reappear in the second and third deeds; but the first name in the 
third deed is John a Compound, which, by the way, stands next to 
Nesaheagun's in the first, and the fourth is Warun Compound, who 
is described as " Nesaheg's son," which may mean his nephew. If 
John a Compound was also a nephew of Nesaheagun, or his brother, 
he may have been his successor in the sachemship. This name, 
Compound, if not of English origin, has been forced into a strange 
resemblance to English; but there is reason to suspect that it is an 
Indian name in disguise, possibly a place-name. In the third deed 
— that of December 2, 1684 — the full name is given as John a Com- 
powne. The chief who figures most prominently in the early his- 
tory of Virginia was named Powhattan, from the falls in the river 
{patiat-haime) near which he lived. Is it not possible that the 
" Indian proprietor " who here comes before us may have been 
named in a similar way from the " other-side falls," wherever these 
inay have been ? At all events, acompoK<n-tuk (if there were such a 
name) would mean " the falls on the other side," and might easily 
have been transformed by " otosis " into " a-Compound." The 
name Compounce, attached to a pond in the north-western part of 
Southington, is usually regarded as a corruption of "Compound's;" 
but in this latest form it resembles more closely the name as it 
appears in the Farmington deed of 1673, where it is given as Com- 
paus. 

The third name in the deed of 1674, Queramouch, is interesting 
as being identical with one of the three Indian names already men- 
tioned in the curious deed of 1657, where it appears as Querrimus 

* President Stiles, First Series Mass. His. Coll., Vol. X, p. loi. 



INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGN AT [IRES. t^^ 

or Queromiis. His associates in the deed of 1657 were Kepaquamp 
and Mataneag. This last name may aiTord another instance of the 
naming of a chief from the place where he lived. There was a place 
called Mattaneaug, or Matianock, near the mouth of Farmington 
river in Windsor. In the Colonial Records of 1640 it is called ?vlat- 
tanag. Arramamet, described in 1636 as " sachem of Matianocke," 
lived near the present line between Windsor and Hartford, and 
twenty years later — in 1657 — the same sachem or his successor may 
have been designated by the name of the place at which he resided.* 

Of the names Uncowate and " Nenapush vSquaw " we know 
nothing further. But Patucko, whose name is the first in the deed 
of April, 1684, and who is superseded in the deed of December 
following by " Patucko's squaw," ought to interest us especially as 
the source of one of the place-names that have survived to the pres- 
ent day. One would hardly suspect a connection between Tucker's 
Ring, in the northwest corner of the town of Wolcott, and this 
Indian " proprietor," but such a connection exists. A .suggestion of 
it is found in the name Ptuckering Road, and in a deed of 1731, cited 
in Dr. Bronson's " History of Waterbury," Potucko's Ring is 
definitely mentioned. If the story is true that he " kindled a fire 
in the form of a large ring around a hill, in hunting deer, and per- 
ished within it," that may account for the place-name. At the same 
time it is worthy of mention that potiicko (in the Narragansett dialect 
puttitkki, in the Massachusetts, /if/'/z/Y'''''') means round. Dr. Trumbull 
calls attention to the fact that "a Patackhousc, sister of Nessahe- 
gen of Pequannoc, signed a deed to Windsor in 1665."! ^^ Potucko 
lost his life (in the way indicated by tradition, or otherwise) 
between April and December, 1684, the substitution of his squaw's 
name for his in the later deed would readily be explained. 

Attention has already been called to the fact that while Moman- 
tow's squaw is named as one of the grantors in the deed of April, 
1684, Momantow himself was among those who witnessed it. This 
would indicate that the wife had certain rights in the second grant 
of land in which the husband did not share. Whether this was the 
case with other squaws who are named in the deed as grantors, it is 
difficult to say; but this can hardly be the explanation of the substi- 
tution of Potucko's scpaw for Potucko himself in the deed of Decem- 
ber, 1684, because the land therein described is substantially the 

* See Trumbull's " Indian Geographical Names," p. 27. 

+ " Indian Geographical Names," p. 57. In several of the Algonkin versions of the Lord's prayer, 
Petukketieag or some cognate word is used for "bread," meaning "something round." In the Mohegan 
dialect it is "'tquogh; in the Virginia tuckahoe, whence the modern " hoe-cake." 

Potucko's name is perpetuated in another way in Waterbury— in Potucko Assembly (No. 329) of the 
" Royal Society of Good Fellows," an insurance fraternity. 



34 HISTOBY OF WATEBBURT. 

same as that which Potucko, with others, deeded ten years before. 
It is nevertheless true that a study of these names and relationships 
inevitably suggests that the gt^ns, as disting-uished from the tribe, 
had come to be somehow recogTiized in the ownership of land as 
well as of personal property. The rule which (as we have seen) had 
become well established among the Aztecs may have begun to 
operate among the Indians of Connecticut. 

The onlv other names in the three Farmington deeds that 
require notice are Ouatoquechuck. who has already been referred 
to as Taphow's son, and Hachatowsuck. This last name, under 
the form '* Hatchetowset." occurs frequently in the "Woodbury and 
Litchtield records, but evidently as desigTiating another person. He 
is mentioned in the Litchtield Land Records as buying and selling 
land as late as 1736. and in 1741 he petitioned the General Court to 
help him to a di\'ision of the Indian lands at Pootatuck. at which 
date his eldest child was aged sixteen. It is evident from these 
facts that the Pootatuck Indian could not be identical with the signer 
of the deed of 1684. One who was suthciently prominent at that 
date to stand second among the native " proprietors "' of Mattatuck. 
would hardly be speculating in land tifty-two years afterward. 
Besides, there is no reason to doubt that the same name frequently 
belonged to persons of different tribes. If we could analyze Indian 
personal names, we should probably find it to be a matter of course 




XEXT FAGEV 



that there should be a Hachetowsuck in the Tunxis tribe and an 
Atcheiouset among the Pootatucks. But it illustrates the curious 
changes to which Indian names were subject on European lips, to 

* Tais " pesd* " ins foein-i is iSS ^ ia a cave • aftersrard destroyed Ijy csarryi^^t at Tsriey Hill, cetr 
Tariey Bivct. Derfey. It is i- imdws kwg asd e V by =14 iocacs is Gia=«ter al the medie. Tic t^aie- 
j^ ^ i ccmract aiic^i siitt. it is wcm siEOOth cc osie sde, bet qo« at t£e er. C5. 



mDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES. 35 

find that the Pootatuck Atchetouset, in his petition to the General 
Court, appears under the guise of " Hatchet Tousey." Many years 
later a squaw of the Turkey Hill band, near Derby, bore the name 
of Moll Hatchet. She was said to have been so called from the fact 
that she habitually carried a hatchet with her; but the name seems 
to have belonged to her family and was very probably a remnant of 
some such genuine Indian name as Hatchetowsuck. In " Hatchet 
Tousey " the transformation may be seen taking place. 

When we turn to the deed given by the Paugasuck or Derby 
Indians, we find an entirely new set of names before us, represent- 
ing another and for the most part a distinct tribe. The names 
mentioned in the body of the deed, and at the end of it, are as 
follows : Awawus, Conquapatana, Curan, Cocapadous, Cocoeson, 
Tataracum, Kekasahum, Wenuntacun, Wechumunke, Weruncaske, 
Arumpiske and Notanumhke. Of the twelve persons thus desig- 
nated the first eight appear to have been men, the other four were 
women. Of the relations of the grantors to one another and to 
other Indians, there are some slight indications. Although the 
name of Awawus comes first in the list, it is Conquepatana who is 
designated "sagamore," that is, sachem.* But Awawus, as the 
position of his name indicates, must have been sufficiently promi- 
nent among the grantors to hold a representative place; for in a 
memorandum attached to the deed by Governor Robert Treat of Mil- 
ford, he calls him "the Indian proprietor." "Awawas, the Indian 
proprietor," he says, " appeared at my house and owned this deed 
above mentioned to be his act, and that he has signed and sealed to 
it." On the i8th of April, Conquepatana made a similar acknowl- 
edgment of the deed before the governor, "and said he knew what 
was in it, and said it was weregeny \ The relation between the name 

*The impression is prevalent — based upon the positive statements of some of the earlier writers — that the 
terms " sachem" and " sagamore" designated two distinct offices, the second inferior and subordinate to the 
first. But there seems to be no good ground for such a representation. Dr. J. H. Trumbull, in his edition 
of Roger Williams's " Key," note 292, says that a comparison of the several forms of the word as found in 
different Algonkin dialects " establishes the identity of sachem with sagamore." 

In the Massachusetts vocabulary attached to Wood's " New England's Prospect," published in 1635, sag- 
amore and sachem are said to be the same, although Wood says elsewhere (in the monarchical phraseology so 
generally adopted) that " a king of large dominions hath his viceroys or inferior kings under him, to agitate 
his state affairs and keep his subjects in good decorum. Other offices there be," he adds, " but how to distin- 
guish them by name is something difficult " (p. 90, reprint of 1863). Daniel Gookin, on the other hand, 
writing about 1674, seems to make a difference between the two terms. He says, speaking of the Pequots : 
" Their chief sachem held dominion over divers petty sagamores." (First Series Mass. His. Coll., vol. I. p. 
147)- 

+ Weregen means " a good thing." In the form Wauregan the word has been appropriated as the name 
of a manufacturing company and a village in eastern Connecticut. Dr. Trumbull (" Indian Names," p. 79) 
says: " It was doubtless suggested by a line in Dr. Elisha Tracy's epitaph on Sam Uncas in the Mohegan 
burying-ground in Norwich : 

' For courage bold, for things wauregan 
He was the glory of Moheagon.' " 



^(> 



HISTOBY OF WATERBURT. 



of the sagamore and the fourth name in the list, Cocapadonsh, 
is not apparent at first glance, but comes to view when we give 
them as they are given in another deed (April i, 1709), where they 
are written " Cockapotanah," and "Cockapotoch." The sagamore 
is known in later records as Konkapot, and he who stands fourth in 
the list was Konkapot-oos, perhaps Little Konkapot. It may be 
worth while to mention in this connection that Konkapotanah lived 
imtil 1731, and that on Jime 28, 1711, he and his son "Tom Indian" 
deeded to the proprietors of Waterbury, for a consideration of 
twenty-five shillings, "a small piece of land" north of Derby 
bounds, west of the Naugatuck river, and south of Toantuck brook.* 
In a deed given by Nonnewaug and other Pootatuck Indians, in 
1700, to the people of Woodbury, Konkapotana's son is included 
among the signers, and also another of the grantors we are just 
now considering, Wenuntacun; from which it would appear that 
close relationi^hips existed between the Paugasucks and the Poota- 
tucks similar to those between the Paugasucks and the Tunxis. Of 
the other four men in our list, namely Curan and Cocoeson, two are 
represented not onl}- personally, but by the women whose names 
follow. One of these, Arumpiske, is said to be Curan's squaw, and 
another, Notanumke, Curan's sister. The other two women, 
Wechumunke and Weruncaske, are designated as Cocoeson's sis- 
ters. 

By the mention of Cocoeson's sisters we are brought to a consid- 
eration of the relation of this fourth deed to the other Waterbury 
deeds, or rather, the relation of these Paugasuck Indians to the 
Farmington tribe in the ownership of Mattatuck territory. It has 
already been suggested that Wawowus of the second deed (April 
29, 1684) was identical with Ahvaush of the first. Is it not proba- 
ble that Awawus, whose name comes first in this Paugasuck deed — 
the "Indian proprietor " who appeared before Governor Treat — is 
the same person ? It is possible, too, that the Curan of this fourth 
deed is identical with Caran-chaquo, of the first, and the position 
of his name, between Conkapotana and Conkapotoos, suggests a 
relationship between him and them. But, however this may be, we 



* It would be interesting to know whether there was any relation of kinship between Konkapotana and 
Captain Konkapot, who figures so prominently among the StockbridKe Indians of the upper Housatonic. A 
deed of the territory comprising the " upper and lower Housatonic townships," made in 1724, was signed by 
Konkapot and twenty others. He received his captain's commission from Governor Belcher, in 1734, was 
baptized in 1735, and died previous to 1770— one of the first fruits of the mission to the Housatonic Indians, 
of which the Rev. Samuel Hopkins, born in Waterbury, was the founder. 

The name is perpetuated in Konkapot river in North Canaan, and in Konkapot's brook in the southeast- 
ern part of Stockbridge, Mass. This latter stream has become in the mouths of the people " Konk's brook," 
and latterly, with the help of " otosis " has been degraded into " Skunk's brook." Thus is the stately name 
of the sachem of the Paugasucks reduced to an offensive monosyllable! 



INDIAN DEEDS AND SIGNATURES. 37 

may feel certain that the sisters of Cocoeson mentioned here are 
identical with the " Cocoeson's sisters " who signed the deed of 
December 2, 1684. And this being the case, we are in a position to 
make still further identifications. We learn from the deed of 
December 2 that Cocoeson's sisters were James's daughters, and that 
one of them was Patucko's squaw and Atumtucko's mother. This 
establishes the fact, suggested by his name, that Atumtucko was 
Patucko's son; it also explains why, in the deed of 1674, Patucko 
"promised for James," and suggests tons that we are to look for 
this James among the Paugasucks. In a deed of 1659, by which the 
Paugasucks sold to Lieutenant Thomas Wheeler the land between the 
Housatonic and Naugatuck rivers, we find the name of " Pagasett 
James." It is almost impossible to avoid the conclusion that this 
Paugasuck James was the James who was the father of Cocoeson 
and his sisters, and that the sister who in the fourth deed is desig- 
nated a squaw, that is, Wechumunke, was Patucko's sc^uaw and 
Atumtucko's mother. At the sale of December 2, it would appear 
that "Atumtoco's mother, Jemes's dafter," was not present, but 
was represented by the other sister, Werumcaske. " Cockeweson's 
sister's dafter " is also mentioned as among the signers. 

It is impossible to say to what extent these twelve grantors 
were representative of the Paugasuck tribe, or whether there were 
any other connections by marriage between the Paugasucks and 
the Tunxis than the two deeds reveal to us. Besides, in attempting 
to interpret and estimate the very slight data afforded us, we must 
remember what has been said in regard to Indian systems of con- 
sanguinity, and the risk of our being misled by English terms, mis- 
takenly applied to Indian relationships. If our supply of facts 
were larger, we might find among the aboriginal proprietors of 
Mattatuck unquestionable evidence of the existence of the gens, of 
inheritance through the mother (as in so many of the Indian 
tribes), and of the descent of the sachemship not from father to 
son, but from uncle to nephew. Such facts as we have brought to 
view seem to point in that direction. 

The results of such an examination as this of old records must 
seem trifling and unsatisfactory. But it will be worth while to 
have labored over them if the aboriginal owners and occupants of 
Waterbury are thus brought more distinctly before us. It gives us 
a somewhat firmer hold upon these flitting forms of the wilderness 
to know their names and some of the ties which bound them to one 
another. We see them roaming the forests and threading their way 
along the river banks, and when the white man comes with his money 
and coats and axes and hoes we see them gathering from the " long 



.8 HISTORY OF WATERS UEY. 

river " on the east and the Housatonic on the south for a confer- 
ence and a sale, and after the deeds have been drawn up and 
signed, and marked with the red man's " marks," returning to their 
camping-grounds little aware of the meaning of the bargain they 
have made. When Governor Treat made his memorandum on the 
Paugasuck deed that Conquepatana had appeared before him and 
acknowledged it, he added that the sagamore " said he knew what 
was in it and said it was rceregen" [good]. But how little he knew ! 
How little he appreciated the far-reaching significance of the trans- 
action that had taken place a few weeks before on the banks of the 
Naugatuck. But it was a peaceable and friendly sale, and so were 
the others that had preceded it. The rival claimants were not hos- 
tile but friendly tribes, and the friendship of both of them for the 
white man remained uiibroken to the end. 




INDIAN I'll'ES 



*(i) The modern pipe in the above cut was made by a Dakota Indian, evidently in imitation of the tom- 
ahawk pipes of an earlier day. It is of catlinite, in two pieces, is very accurately made, and is covered with 
delicately engraved lines. Its length is 15 inches, the diameter of the bowl I/2 inch. It is figured here for 
the sake of the contrast with (2) the rude soapstone pipe below it, found in Milford, Conn., which was made 
perhaps after the settlement of the town. The bowl is nearly square ; the stem 4 inches long. The maker, 
in drilling the hole through the stem, diverged from a direct line and broke through near the base of the 
bowl. The smoker (if it was ever used) must have covered the aperture with his finger. If this is a fair 
specimen of the workmanship of the Wepowaug Indians, a low estimate must be placed upon their skill. (3) 
The pipe with a face and figure upon it displays as much skill as the first, and is a lemarkable specimen 
of orehistoric art. It is described in Chapter V. 



CHAPTER IV. 

ABORIGINAL PLACE-NAMES OF MATTATUCK OBSOLETE NAMES IN THE 

PAUGASUCK DEED OF 1685 — NAMES WHICH STILL SURVIVE — NAMES, 
NOT INDIAN, CONTAINING REMINISCENCES OF INDIAN OCCUPANCY. 

OF the several deeds referred to in the preceding" chapter, the 
fourth, given by the Paugasuck Indians on February 20, 1685, 
is of peculiar interest for two reasons— because of the vari- 
ous memoranda which accompany the signatures, and because of 
the remarkable list of Indian place-names which it contains. 

This deed conveys to the settlers of Mattatuck "twenty parcels 
of land, by their names distinguished ; " but the " parcels " were 
evidently small, and they are designated only by their Indian 
names, and with one or two exceptions are not "distinguished" 
otherwise. The names seem to have been recorded with unusual 
accuracy (as were also the personal names in the deed), and, taken 
as a whole, present an inviting but unproductive field for linguistic 
and topographical investigation. The tract conveyed lay on both 
sides of the Naugatuck river, so that the " twenty parcels of land " 
are in two groups. The eastern section is described as follows : 

"[i] Wecobemeas, the land upon the brook or small river that 
comes through the straits northward of Lebanon, and runs into 
Naugatuck river at south end of Mattatuck bounds, called by the 
English Beacon Hill brook, and [2] Pacowachuck or Asawacomuck, 
and [3] Watapecke, [4] Pacoquarocke, [5] Megunhuttake, [6] Mus- 
quanke, [7] Mamusqunke, [8] Squapnasutte, and [9] Wachu ; which 
nine parcels of land lie on the east side of Naugatuck river, south- 
ward from Mattatuck town ; which comprises all the land betwixt 
the forementioned river, or Beacon Hill brook, and the brook at the 
hither end of Judd's Meadows, called by the name Sqontk ; and from 
Naugatuck river to run eastward to Wallingford and New Haven 
bounds ; with all the lowland on the two brooks forementioned." 

And this is the account of the western section : 

"And other parcels on the west side; the first parcel called by the 
name Saracasks ; the rest as follow : [2] Petowtucke, [3] Weqarunsh, 
[4] Capage, [5] Cocumpasucke, [6] Mequenhuttocke, [7] Panootan, 
[8] Mattuckhott, [9] Cocacocks, [10] Quarasksucks, [11] Towantucke ; 
and half the Cedar swamp, with the land adjacent from it eastward; 
which swamp lies northward of Quassapaug pond ; we say, to run 



40 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

an east line from thence to Nauo-atnck river ; all which parcels of 
land forementioned lying- southward from the said line, and ex- 
tend or are comprised within the butments following- ; From the 
forementioned swamp a straight line to be run to the middle of 
Towantucke pond (or the Cedar swamp a south line), which is 
the west bounds toward Woodbury, and an east line from Towan- 
tucke pond to be the butment south, and Naugatuck river the east 
butment, till we come to Achetaquopag or Warunscopage, and then 
to but upon the east side of the river upon the forementioned 
lands." 

The general outline of this, tract of land — at any rate, of that 
division of it lying on the east side of the river — is not difficult to 
trace ; but to distinguish the " twenty parcels," and to identify them 
at the present day, is quite impossible, and would probably be 
impossible even if we knew the meaning of their Indian names. 
The southern boundary of the eastern section is distinctly stated 
to be Beacon Hill brook, and the northern boundary "the brook 
at the hither end [that is, the northern end] of Judd's Meadows, 
called by the name Sqontk," which must be the stream known 
to-day as Fulling Mill brook, which empties into the Naugatuck at 
Union City. The limits of the western section are not clearly 
stated, but it seems to have been bounded on the north by a line 
running easterly from Cedar swamp ("which swamp lies northward 
of Quassapaug pond") to the river, and on the south by a line 
running from Towantuck pond to the river, and on the west by 
Woodbury. The west bank of the Naugatuck was to be the 
eastern boundary of the upper part of this western tract, but below 
Achetaquopag (or Warunscopag) it was " to abut upon the east side 
of the river, upon the forementioned lands." In other words, the 
native proprietors, claiming ownership on both sides of the river 
below Fulling Mill brook, claimed ownership also of the river itself. 

By observing closely the indications thus given, we are enabled 
to " locate " a few of these parcels of land with some certainty. We 
know " Towantuck " because the name has survived to the present 
day — the only one of these twenty names that has not become 
obsolete. The pond with which it is here connected, is now better 
known as Long Meadow pond (in Middlebury, near the Oxford line), 
but the name has become attached to a station on the New England 
railroad, and has also been selected as the designation of a " tribe " 
of the " Improved Order of Red Men," organized in Waterbury in 
1892. We know also the land designated by the name " Wecobe- 
nieas," because it is distinctly described as "the land upon the 
small river that comes through the straits northward of Lebanon 



INDIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. 41 

[probably where Straitsville is now situated], called by the English 
Beacon Hill brook." * And there is another name, althoiig-h not in- 
cluded among the twenty, which the language of the deed enables 
us to fix somewhat definitely. In the phrase, "the brook at the 
hither end of Judd's Meadows, called by the name Scpntk," the 
name seems to belong to the stream rather than the meadows, and 
in that case, as has already been said, represents the well-known 
Fulling Mill brook of the present day. If it refers to the meadows, 
its identity is equally well established. In this neighborhood, 
apparently, we must fix other two names. According to the inter- 
pretation already given, the eastern boundary of the tract on the 
west side of the Naugatuck was the west bank of that river down to 
a certain point, and below that the east bank of the river was the 
boundary. The point at which the boundary-line crossed the river 
is named " Achetaquopag or Warunscopage ;" and if the claim of 
the Paugasucks on the east side of the river was bounded on the 
north by Fulling Mill brook, as seems evident, then must the spot 
designated by these two names have been near the mouth of that 
brook. Whether the " Copage " which is mentioned among the 
twenty parcels of land is identical with one or both of these, must 
be considered further on. Of the other names in the list of twenty 
there is none that can be positively identified, and only a few whose 
meaning can be ascertained with any certainty. Foremost among 
these is "Wachu," the ninth name in the first group. Wadchu 
always means mountain or hill, and we should, as a matter of course, 
connect it with Beacon Mountain, were it not for the indications in 
the deed that Beacon Hill brook, which flows north of it, was the 
southern limit of the eastern tract. There are other heights on the 
east side of the river in that vicinity, but none to which the name 
" Wachu " could be so fittingly applied. Although there is nothing 
in the deeds to help us to further identifications, there are, never- 
theless, two or three points worth noticing. There is, for instance, 
a "Megunhuttake" (Mequenhuttocke) in both groups of names ; but 
it does not follow that there were two distinct and widely separated 
parcels of land thus designated ; the name was doubtless applied to 
a tract bordering on the river and extending along both banks. A 
connection between "Copage," which stands fourth in the second 

*J. W. Barber, writing in 1836, or earlier, says: "About fourteen miles from New Haven the main 
road to Waterbury passes by Beacon Mountain, a rude ridge of almost naked rock, stretching southwest. At 
this place is CoUins's tavern, lonj; known as an excellent public house, and the Straitsville post office. About 
half a mile south of Mr. CoUins's the road passes through a narrow defile formed by a gap in the mountain 
[doubtless the "straits" referred to in the deed], barely sufficient in width for a road and a small but 
sprightly brook which winds through the narrow passage. On both sides the cliffs are lofty, particularly on 
the west ; on the east, at a little distance from the road, they overhang in a threatening manner." (" Con- 
necticut Historical Collections," p. 186, first edition). 



42 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

group, and the two names " Achetacopag " and " Warunscopag- " has 
already been suggested. The close connection between the sixth 
and seventh names in the first group—" Musquanke " and " Mamus- 
qunke "—is obvious ; and the same is true, so far as the structure of 
the words is concerned, of " Pacowachuck " and " Pacoquarocke." 
The piece of land known as "Pacowachuck" was known also by 
another name entirely different, " Asawacomuck." 

As regards the meanings of these names, it would be interesting 
to know them, even if the places to which they belonged could not 
be identified. Every Indian name had a meaning, and was "so 
framed as to convey that meaning with precision ; " every place- 
name "described the locality to which it was affixed."* But the 
names in the list before us are in the Quiripi dialect, and do not 
readily lend themselves to any such analysis as can now be made. 
The most that can be done is to throw^ out a few suggestions and to 
adduce an occasional parallel. 

The first name in the list of twenty— "Wecobemeas"— bears a 
close resemblance to " Wecuppcemee," the name of a small river in 
Bethlehem and Woodbury, one of the three streams which unite to 
form the Pomperaug. The stream seems to have derived its name 
from an Indian chief (Wickapema, Weekpemes) who is on record as 
a witness to certain Woodbury deeds. The name means "bass- 
wood" or "linden." But whether Wecuppeemee, the chief, called 
himself "the Linden," or w^as so denominated by the English 
because he lived at a place where lindens grew, is, as Dr. Trumbull 
remarks, doubtful. The name which in Woodbury is connected 
with a stream is applied in the list before us to "the land upon 
Beacon Hill brook." It probably designated a spot where bass- 
wood trees grew, and which could easily be distinguished in this 
way. In the second name, " Pacowachuck," one readily recognizes 
wachii, "mountain" or "hill," as a component part, and \i paco is a 
variation of pahgiic, as it frequently is, the entire word must mean 
"at the clear (or open) mountain," and the reference must be to 
some hill divested of woods. A similar analysis would give us as 
the meaning of Pacoquaroke " clear long place," referring perhaps to 
some strip of meadow on the river-bank, or some smooth place in 
the river itself. The alternative designation of "Pacowachuck," 
which is "Asawacomuck" {ashaway - commok) seems to mean "an 
enclosed place between." In the name " Musquanke " a resemblance 
may be traced to Massacunnock {Mas/icqiianokc), the Indian name of 
Falcon Island, south of Guilford, which means " place of fish-haw^ks," 



*Dr. Trumbull, "Composition of Indian ( ieographical Names," in Vol. II. of " Collections of the Conn. 
His. Society," pp. 3, 4. 



INDIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. 43, 

or the root of the name may be m'sqt(ammaug, meaning "red fish," 
that is, sahiion. But the name " ^lamusquunke " which is associated 
with the other, suggests a derivation different from both of these. 
In the third name on the west side of the river, " Wequarunsh," the 
prefix wcqua is a familiar one, meaning "at the end," and thence "a 
point." It is possible that in the remainder of the word we have the 
inseparable gQ,r\QX\Q - ompsk ("a standing rock"), in which case the 
name would mean "at the end of the ledge," or would designate 
some place or point with an "upright rock at the end."* In " Pan- 
ootan," one can hardly help suspecting that the // of the first sylla- 
ble ought to have been written //, in which case we should find in 
the word a reminder of our old friend Powhattan and the " falls " 
which gave him his name.f Paiiat-han means "falls in a rapid 
stream ;" but whether there are falls or even rapids in the Nauga- 
tuck, within the limits indicated by the deed, of sufficient import- 
ance to justify such an appellation, may be open to question. In 
the name which follows this, " Mattuckhott," the first syllable may 
represent matta, "without," which appears again in "Mattatuck," or 
the whole word may stand for m'tugk-ut, meaning "at the tree." 
The only other name of the twenty, of which anything definite can 
be said is "Capage." It is substantially the same as Cupheag, the 
old name of Stratford, (the same as Quebec also) and means "a place 
shut in," "narrows" or "a cove." The writer of this chapter 
suggested, in the Rev. Samuel Orcutt's "History of Derby," J that 
the name designated "possibly the narrows in the river at Beacon 
hill." If this "Capage" is identical with the copage in "Acheta- 
quopag or Warunscopage " — the point at which the eastern bound- 
ary line crossed the Naugatuck — then must we locate it at the north- 
ern rather than the southern end of the eastern section of the 
Paugasuck grant— that is, at Fulling Mill brook, rather than at 
Beacon hill. But there is no good reason for insisting on their 
identity. As for "Warunscopage," perhaps we have here a personal 
name associated with a place-name in a cpite unusual way. Among 
the signers of the deeds given to Waterbury, Warun Compound holds 
a leading place. May not this spot at which the boundary line 
crossed the river have been known as Warun's Copage ? and in 



*In the agreement made May 22, 1674, between New Haven, Milford, Branford and Wallingford with 
reference to their bounds, in the memorandum attached to the New Haven and Milford section, we read of 
" a straight line up into the country, which line shall run upon the rock or stone called ' the beacon,' which 
lieth upon the upper end of the hill called Beacon hill, and from thence to the end of the bounds" (Conn. 
Col. Records, Vol. Ill, p. 233). 

+ See p. 32. 

*" Indian Names of Places," pp. xciii— xxvii. of Orcutt's "Derby," see also Dr. Trumbull's "Indian 
Geographical Names," pp. 8, 23. 



44 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Acheta-copag may we not recognize another of our signers, 
Achetowsuck ? These, however, are mere possibilities.* 

In our interpretation of the deed, we have brought these last 
mentioned names into close association with " vSc^ontk," a name 
attached, apparently, to " the brook at the hither end of Judd's 
Meadows," which we have identified as Fulling Mill brook. The 
name, "Squaniuck," is attached to a tract of land on the east bank 
of the Housatonic river, at the mouth of Four Mile brook, in vSey- 
mour, and to a settlement of a dozen houses at that point. In a 
Derby deed of 1678 it is described as "a certain tract called and 
known as Wesqiiantook and Rockhouse hill," whence it appears 
that " Scjuantiick" is an abbreviated form of the original name, the 
meaning of which. Dr. Trumbull says, "is not ascertained." It is 
doubtful whether the name " wSciontk," which we have connected 
with Fulling Mill brook, is to be considered etymologically the 
same as the Squantuck in Seymour, or is rather to be identified, 
with Scantic, the name of a stream in another part of the state — 
between East and South Windsor. The latter Dr. Trumbull derives 
from pcska-'tiik, "where the river branches" — a meaning which 
would be sufficiently applicable to the place at which Fulling Mill 
brook empties into the Naugatuck. In this connection it is worthy 
of remark that in Pierson's Catechism, which represents the dialect 
of the Paugasuck Indians, the word squanta is used as the rendering 
for "gates." f 

We have given our attention thus far to the obsolete place- 
names in the Paugasuck deed. But besides these, and besides 
"Towantuck," to which reference has been made, there are other 
geographical names mentioned here, which are by no means 
obsolete, but are in daily use and have attained to no little import- 
ance. These are " Naugatuck " and " Ouassapaug," and we may add 
"Mattatuck." 

" Mattatuck " is mentioned in the deed, first as the name of the 
"township" which the grantees represent, and secondly, as an alter- 
native name of the river. The stream which was known in the 
lower part of its course as the Naugatuck, was known further north 
as the Mattatuck, and afterward also as the Waterbury river. By 
the help of early records, the history of the name can readily be 

* By mistake of the copyist, the name Warunscopage appears in the Waterbury Land Records as Marusco- 
pag, the initial IV having been taken for an M. In this incorrect form it was transferred to the list in 
Orcutt's "History of Derby,"' p. xcv, and thence into Dr. Trumbull's " Indian Geographical Names," pp. 
2, 8, 23. In the original deed (the discovery of which is referred to elsewhere) the name is plainly "Waruns- 
copage." In the list in Orcutt's "Derby," the name Quarasksucks^the nineteenth in our list of twenty — 
was given as " Gawuskesucks," having been incorrectly deciphered. 

+ " Some Helps for the Indians," p. 65 of Dr. Trumbull's reprint. 



INDIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. 45 

traced. Its first occurrence is in the deed of February 8, 1657-8, 
already referred to, by which certain lands in the upper part of the 
Nau^-atuck valley were granted to William Lewis and Samuel Steele, 
of Farming-ton. The deed reads, " A parcel or tract of land called 
' Matetacoke,' that is to say, the hill from whence John Stanley 
and John Andrews brought the black lead, and all the land within 
eight mile of that hill on either side." " Matetacoke " evidently 
stands for Matuhtugk-o/ike, meaning a "place without trees," and was 
probably an accurate description of the hill referred to, or of some 
spot in its neighborhood. If appliea to a hill, it must have been a 
bare and treeless hill, and might with ec^ual propriety have been 
described by the name " Pacowachuck," referred to above. The 
next occurrence of the name is fifteen years subsequent to the deed 
to Lewis and Steele. It is in a document embodying the report of a 
committee of the General Court sent out in behalf of the people of 
Farmington to inquire in regard to a place for a new settlement in 
the Naugatuck valley. They say they " have been to view Matituc 
oockc in reference to a plantation," and "do judge it capable of the 
same." The Farmington people immediately petitioned the Court 
for permission to make a settlement, and in their petition they 
speak of " having found out a tract at a place called by the Indians 
Matitacoocke, which we apprehend may sufficiently accommodate to 
make a small plantation." As the reference here is unquestionably 
to the meadows of Waterbury, we must suppose that an Indian name 
belonging to a place a number of miles further up the river was 
used by a kind of accommodation, or that during the interval of 
fifteen years the scope of the name had been gradually enlarging 
until in popular use it covered the entire region, or else that the 
same name was independently given to two distinct localities — to 
the place where the black lead was found, because it was a bare and 
treeless hill, and to the Waterbury meadows for a similar reason, 
because they were destitute of trees. Since every Indian place- 
name was a description of the locality to which it was affixed, such 
a coincidence as this might easil}' happen. 

In each instance of its occurrence thus far, the name appears in 
its larger form, terminating in okc or oockc. It occurs in this form 
in the petition to the General Court in October, 1673. But in the 
record of the action of the Court on this petition, the name is given 
in the shortened form, "Mattatock," and this form came immedi- 
ately into use. The committee appointed to explore the region 
speak in their report, made in April, 1674, of having "viewed the 
lands upon the Mattatuck river," and in tlie record of the Court, 
May 18, the expression used is "a plantation at Mattatuck." From 



46 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

this time onward until 1686, the place and also the river were known 
by this name. In the records for May 13, 1675, we read of "the new 
town going up at Mattatuck," and a little further on, Mattatuck is 
mentioned in connection with Derby and Woodbury (whose names 
had recently been changed) and Pottatock and Wyantenuck (whose 
names were afterward changed to Southbury and New Milford) as 
towns whose boundaries required to be immediately ascertained 
and established. In the record for May 15, 1686, we read: "This 
Court grants that Mattatuck shall be and belong to the County of 
Hartford ; and the name of the plantation shall be for the future 
Waterbury. "* 

Although " Mattatuck " was not retained as the name of the 
town, and has been superseded by " Naugatuck " as the name of the 
river, nevertheless it has not become extinct. It was duplicated on 
Long Island as early as 1658,! and survives there, in the form " Mat- 
tituck," as the name of a pleasant little village, situated between 
Long Island sound and Great Peconic bay. It has survived also in 
the upper part of the Naugatuck valley almost to the present time ; 
at all events, it was customary a few years ago to speak of East 
Litchfield as Mattatuck. The name is attached to a street in the 
city of Waterbury — that which runs northward from West Main 
street along the eastern channel of the Naugatuck river ; also to a 
local Historical society, organized in 1878, which has for its field the 
territory embraced within the ancient town. The " Mattatuck 
Manufacturing compan}^," established in 1847, has become extinct ; 
but the name is connected with other organizations. There is a 
Mattatuck Council of the "Royal Arcanum" (an insurance frater- 
nity), and a Mattatuck Drum Corps. The name occurs, finally, in the 
title of a book published in 1892 — "The Churches of Mattatuck" — 
w^hich contains the record of the celebration of the bi-centenary of 
the First chiirch in Waterbury (November 4 and 5, 1891), with 
sketches of all the Congregational churches within the ancient 
domain. 

The name " Naugatuck," which appears in the Paugasuck deed as 
the established designation of the Mattatuck river, was originally 
used in a very restricted sense, but is now the most frequently 



*Conn. Col. Records, Vol. II, pp. 210, 224, 249, 253 ; Vol. Ill, p. 197. 

According to Dr. Bronson (" History of Waterbury," p. 67), the new name was selected as descriptive. 
" The new town took its name of Waterbury on account of its numerous rivers, rivulets, ponds, swamps, 
'boggy meadows' and wet lands." " It is a pit5%"-adds Dr. Bronson, " that the beautiful old Indian name 
' Mattatuck ' was not retained. But our Puritan ancestors regarded these native words as heathenish, and 
were in haste to discard and forget them." 

+ New Haven Col. Records, Vol. II, pp. 233, 302, 462, 463: "A parcel of land called Mattatuck and 
Akkabawke" [Aquebogue]. 



INDIAN OEOGBAPHIGAL NAMES. 



47 



mentioned and most widely known of all the aboriginal names in the 
valley. The first instance of its occurrence is in the Records of the 
Jurisdiction of New Haven for May 27, 1657. Among the conditions 
proposed by the inhabitants of Paugasuck, upon which they were 
willing to "submit themselves to the Jurisdiction," the first was in 
these words : " That they have liberty to buy the Indians' land, 
behind them, that is over Naugatuck river, and not toward New 
Haven bounds, and also above them northward, up into the coiin- 
try." * In a deed to Thomas Wheeler, the same year, the name 
occurs again ; and again in a deed to Joseph Hawley and Henry 
Tomlinson, of Stratford, August 16, 1668, and frequently afterward 
in the Derby records and the colonial records of New Haven and 
Connecticut. This was the name by which the river was known in 
the lower part of the valley. Yet in a report made to the General 
Court by a Derby and Mattatuck committee, in May, 1680, it is 
designated once as " Mattatock river," and twice as the " Nagotock 
or Mattatock." When the plantation of Mattatuck became the town 
of Waterbury, the name Waterbury was also applied to the river, 
but did not retain its hold upon it.f Of course it is impossible to 
say at what date the name " Naugatuck " achieved a complete vic- 
tory, but it appears to have had the field to itself for more than a 
hundred years past. And being used to designate the river, it came 
to be applied as a matter of course to the valley through which the 
river flows. 

This was the only use of the name until 1844, when it was 
adopted as the name of a new town. At the May session of the 
General Assembly in that year, that part of Waterbury embraced 
within the society of Salem, with portions of Bethany and Oxford, 
was " incorporated as a distinct town, by the name of Naugatuck." % 
A year later (Ma)^, 1845), the legislature incorporated the " Nauga- 
tuck Railroad company," and from that time the old aboriginal 
name became a household word to thousands who might not other- 
wise have known it. 

Besides the larger uses of the name thus far indicated, it is 
applied to several organizations in the town of Naugatuck. These 
are the Naugatuck Electric Light company, the Naugatuck Electric 



* New Haven Col. Records, Vol. II, p. 223. 

+ For example, in the petition of the people of Westbury (afterward Watertown) for "winter privileges," 
in October, 1732, they speak of being separated from the meeting-house by " a great river which is called 
Waterbury river, which for great part of the winter and spring is not passable." In the Litchfield records 
this is the name generally used. 

X Resolutions and Private Acts, pp. 86-89. Dr. Bronson says, in his " History of Waterbury," p. 67 : 
" Our friends down the river showed their good sense when they called their new town Naugatuck (another 
beautiful name) — where the second settlement in the valley was made." 



48 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

Time company, the Naugatuck Malleable Iron company, the Nauga- 
tuck Water company, and the Naugatuck Musical Union. It may 
be added that since 1870, the name "Naugatuck Valley" has been 
applied to a newspaper — the " Sentinel," published at Ansonia. In 
r879 the same designation was given to a newly organized Associ- 
ation of Congregational ministers, and in 1883 to a new Conference 
of Congregational churches. 

As regards the meaning of this name, the traditional derivation 
is given in Dr. Bronson's "History of Waterbury."* Naiikotiink, the 
original form of the word, is there said to mean "one large tree," 
and to have been the original name of Humphreysville (now Sey- 
mour), which was so called from a large tree formerly standing 
near Rock Rimmon at Seymour. The same derivation is given in a 
letter from vStiles French of Northampton, Mass., forinerly of Sey- 
mour, who received it from the Rev. Smith Dayton, whose authority 
was P^unice Mauwee, the daughter of " Chuce." Mr. French says : 
" She told Mr. Dayton that the name Naugatuck meant ' one big 
tree,' and was pronounced by the Indians Naiv-ka-timk. This 'one 
big tree ' stood about where the Copper works in Seymour now 
are, and afforded the Indians a shade when they came to the 
Rimmon falls to fish." This tradition is apparently direct and 
authentic. It was probably the foundation for the statement of Mr. 
J. W. DeForest (a native of Seymour) in the preface to his " History 
of the Indians of Connecticut," that " Naugatuck was not anciently 
the name of the river to which it is now attached, but of a place on 
the banks of that river." In Mr. DeForest's brief list of words in 
the Naugatuck dialect the word for "tree" is tooJzh ; in Pierson's 
Catechism it isftuk. The usual form in the vocabularies is milituck 
or mchtiig, but the initial w does not belong to the root. The last 
syllable of Nauga-tuck may therefore very well stand for "tree," 
but the remainder of it is not so easily identified. Dr. Trumbull 
accepts the traditional derivation, ;/f?«y('f/-/////i,^/{', meaning "one tree;" 
but in so doing he seems to disregard an important verbal distinc- 
tion upon which he has elsewhere laid stress.f There is documentary 

* p. 15, note. A writer in the "Waterbury American" of May i, 187Q, mentions two entirely distinct 
interpretations which he has met with : " Some say that ' Naugatuck ' means ' rushing water,' others, ' beauti- 
ful vale.'" There is no foundation for either of these. 

■t- In his reprint of Koger Williams's " Key," Dr. Trumbull says: " The primary signification of nquit 
seems to be ' first in order,' — the beginning of a series or of progression not yet completed ; while 
J>aivsi(ck denotes 'one by itself,' a unit, without reference to a series;" and this seems to be sustained by 
Pierson's Catechism, which translates, '" first " by negoitne, but when it refers to the " one true God " renders 
"one" hy pasiik. (Trumbull's "Indian names," p. 30; Williams's "Key into the Indian Language of 
America," Trumbull's reprint, p. 50; " Some Helps to the Indians," pp. 11, 13.) One would suppose that if 
the distinction was ever a real one, it would be made in such a case as this, that is, in designating a well known 
and apparently isolated tree. 



INDIAN OEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. 49 

evidence to sustain the statement that "Naugatuck" was at first 
not the name of the river, but of a place on the river ; for in the 
report of a committee appointed by the General Court (February, 
1676) "to order the settlement of the lands at Derby," we meet with 
the expression, "the river that cometh from Nawgatuck." The 
phrase reveals the process by which the place-name, more than 
twenty years before this, had come to be attached to the river. 
But whether the derivation of the name received from the vSquaw 
Eunice, a hundred and fifty years later, was anything better than 
an etymological venture on her part, is perhaps an open question. 
Dr. Jonathan Edwards, in his "Observations on the language of the 
Muhhekaneew Indians," informs us that the Indian name of Stock- 
bridge, Mass., was JVtiogquctookokc, and Dr. Trumbull says that this 
means a "bend-of-the-river place." In view of the decided bend in 
the river at vSeymour, wh}' may we not suppose that it is this that 
is represented in the name "Naugatuck," rather than some tree 
standing by itself — especially when Naukot-tiiiigk would have meant 
not "a single tree," but one of a series of trees? Waiving this 
objection, we should have had in the one case A^aiikot-tniigk-oke, and 
in the other, Wnogko-tuck-oke. The okc is dropped in either case, and 
there are numerous instances of the dropping of the slight sound 
represented by the initial W. In a Derby deed dated April 22, 
1678, "the fishing place at Naugatuck" is definitely mentioned; 
and there can be no doubt that this ancient " Naugatuck " which 
gave the river its name, was at or near the spot where Seymour 
now stands. But it is quite as likely to have been designated the 
" fishing-place at the bend in the river," as " the fishing-place at 
the one tree." When " Chuce " went there, with his band, about 
1720, it was the only piece of land in the town of Derby which the 
Indians had not sold. Because of its value as a " fishing place " 
they clung to it to the last. 

Another geographical name found in the Paugasuck deed is 
" Ouassapaug " — applied to the beautiful lake which lies just west 
of the western boundary of Alattatuck, part of it in Middlebury and 
part in Woodbury. In a Woodbury deed of October 30, 1687, it is 
spoken of as " the pond called and commonly known by the name 
Quassapaug," and the eastern boundary of the town is said to be 
" four score rod eastward of the easternmost of the pond " Although, 
it does not lie within Waterbury territory, it has long been a place 
of resort for Waterbury people, and its name is mentioned more 
frequently, perhaps, than any other of the aboriginal names belong- 
ing to the region. It is drained by the Quassapaug river, or Eight 
Mile brook, which empties into the Housatonic at Punkups. Mr. 
4 



^o HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

William Cothren, in his " History of Woodbury," speaking of 
Captain John Miner, says : " To the lovely lake on the eastern 
borders he applied the name Quassapaug, or ' The Beautiful Clear 
Water.' This pleasant sheet of water, so cosily nestling among 
the verdant hills, furnished one of the first fishing places to the 
new settlers, cut off as they were from the seaboard by the bound- 
less forests lying between them and the sea." On a subsequent 
page, Mr. Cothren suggests another interpretation of the name — 
"Rocky pond"* — on the supposition that the first two syllables 
represent gussiik, meaning " rock " or " stone." But this word for 
" rock," Dr. Trumbull says, is seldom, perhaps never, found in local 
names, the "inseparable generic "- <?;;//x/(' being used instead. Be- 
sides, there would seem to be no special appropriateness in such 
a designation. In regard to the meaning of pai/g there can be no 
doubt. It denotes "water place" {pe-auke), is used for "water at 
rest," or "standing" as distinguished from "flowing" water, and 
is a frequent component of names of small lakes and ponds 
throughout New England. f But the proper interpretation of the 
first part of the word is somewhat uncertain. The Rev. Azel 
Backus, in 1812, in his " Account of Bethlem," interpreted the name 
as signifying "Little pond," apparently deriving it from okosse-paug; 
but in Dr. Trumbull s judgment "he certainly was wrong;" for 
"Quassapaug is not a small, but the largest pond in that region." 
The author of this chapter, in his list of place-names in the Rev. 
Samuel Orcutt's "History of Derby," suggested that the name 
might possibly represent quiinnosti-paug, that is, " Pickerel pond," and 
found incidental support for this opinion in Mr. Cothren's refer- 
ence to the good fishing which the lake furnished to the early 
settlers. Dr. Trumbull, in his "Indian Names of Places in Connec- 
ticut," rejects this interpretation (but on insufficient grounds) and 
proposes another.;]: He says it " may have been denominated k'chc- 
paug, that is, 'greatest pond' — a name easily corrupted to Quassa- 
paug." Such a change does not seem an "easy" one, but there is 
documentary evidence in support of this interpretation. In a report 
concerning boundaries, made by the agents of Woodbury and Matta- 



* Cothren's Woodbury, pp. 844, 877. 

+ Dr. TrurabuU's "Composition of Indian Geographical Names," p. 15. 

$ He says : " Dr. Anderson, in Orcutt's " Derby," proposes qunnosu-paug, ' pickerel pond,' to which the 
«nly objection is that after names of fish, inaug, 'fishing place,' was used, instead of paug, 'pond,' or 
tuck, ' river.' " But if Noosup-paug, " Beaver pond," is allowable (see p. 40), why not Quunnosu-paug? 
Besides, in his paper on the " Composition of Indian Geographical Names," Dr. Trumbull suggests the very 
analysis which is here proposed. He says (p. 43) : '' Quinshepaug or Quonshapaug, in Mendon, Mass., 
seems to denote a ' pickerel pond ' (qunnosu-paug)" The opinion expressed in his " Indian Names in Con- 
necticut " may be the result of later investigation ; but may it not be possible that maug\v&% used of fishing- 
places in rivers^ rather than in ponds ? 



INDIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. 



51 



tuck, June 29, 1680, we find the expression, "the great pond, com- 
monly called or known by the name of Ouassapaug." It would seem 
as if here the Indian name and the English translation of it had 
been brought together.* 

Mr. Cothren, in the " History of Woodbury," speaks of " the care 
with which our fathers gathered np and applied the beautiful 
Indian names which abound in our territory." He says elsewhere 
that "no town of equal dimensions within the writer's knowledge 
has retained so many of them," and refers to the fact that in the 
neighboring town of Watertown not a single Indian place-name 
remains. f Ancient Mattatuck, taken as a w^hole, has not been quite 
as unfortunate as that part of it now known as Watertown ; but the 
real Indian place-names which have come down to ns, in addition to 
those included in the Paugasuck deed, are very few, — not more than 
a half dozen, all told. 

The first to be mentioned (following the alphabetical order), and 
perhaps the most interesting, is "Abrigador." This is the name of a 
high hill half a mile southeast of Centre square, Waterbury, — now a 
thickly settled district of the city. The residents of the district 
sometimes speak of it as " the Abligator," and the transition from 
this to " Alligator " is occasionally made. In the list of place-names 
in Mr. Orcutt's " History of Derby," the opinion was expressed that 
this name was not of Indian origin, but was a Spanish word [abri- 
gadd) meaning "a place of shelter." That it was not an Indian name 
was formerly the opinion of Dr. Trumbull also ; but in his " Indian 
Names of Places in Connecticut" he derives it from abigad ox abigiiat, 
meaning "covert" or "hiding place," and quotes from the list of 
names in the "History of Derby "the statement that "there is a 
cleft rock on the southwest side of the hill which used to be called 
the Indians' house." That it should be an Indian name in disguise 
is not remarkable ; but it is certainly a remarkable coincidence that 
in the form in which it occurs in Waterbury it should correspond 
so closely to a Spanish word having the same meaning. J 



* Bronson's Waterbury, p. 74. 

+ Cothren's "Woodbury," pp. S44, 58-60. He attributes the preservation of tlie aboriginal names in 
Woodbury in part to Captain John Miner, " the leading man among the colonists," who had been educated 
as missionary to the Indians, understood their language, and was the surveyor for the town (p. 844). 

% Orcutt's " Derby," p. xcvi ; Trumbull's " Indian Names," pp. i, 2. Dr. Trumbull points out that we 
have the same Indian word in " Abagadasset " (" at the place of shelter "), a name found at Merry-meeting 
bay, Maine, and probably in the name " Pictou " also. Another instance which he gives illustrates in a 
striking way the changes through which Indian place-names sometimes pass. The bay of Castine, Me., was 
called by the Abnakis Matsi-abigivadoos-ek^ which means " at the bad small shelter place " or " cove." This 
long descriptive name was shortened to " Chebeguadose," and finally corrupted to " Bigaduce," and then its 
origin was traced by process of the imagination to a supposed French officer. Major Higuyduce, said to have 
•come to Maine with Baron Castine. See also "Composition of Indian Geographical Names," pp. 38, 39. 



52 



HISTORY OF WATERS UBY. 



The name " Compoiince," attached to a pond in the northwest 
part of Southington, has already been referred to. This pond also, 
like Quassapaug', is a place of siimnier resort for Waterbury people. 
That it derived its name from one of the "native proprietors," John 
Compound, or a-Compaus, is unquestionable ; but the origin and 
significance of the personal designation is, as we have seen, a 
matter of uncertainty.* 

Between two and three miles southwest of the centre of Water- 
bury is a high ridge or knoll, close to the road which runs parallel 
to the Town Plot road, some distance to the west of it, known locally 
by the name of " Malmalick " or "Malmanack." In 1882, the Rev. 
Eli B. Clark (since deceased) wrote of it as follows : " My father, 
Eli Clark, owned and for more than fifty years lived upon a farm 
in the southwesterly portion of the town, nearly three miles from 
the centre, embracing within its limits what was then known as 
Malmanack hill — the highest ground for miles around, and com- 
manding a fine prospect in all directions." This hill is supposed to 
have been the site of an Indian camp, and Mr. Clark in his letter 
speaks of the numerous arrow heads and other chipped implements 
which used to be found there in considerable numbers. The name 
is probably of Indian origin, but so disguised that its derivation 
cannot be traced with any certainty. It may possibly mean " barren 
place." 

In the Waterbury records for November, 1729, mention is made 
of the lay-out of a highway towards Westbury (now Watertown), 
which is said to have begun " at the road on the hill against 
Manhan meadow." "The Manhan" is a name which is still in 
common use in W^aterbury, designating a locality about half a 
mile west of Centre square, and generally applied to the canal 
or mill - race which supplies water to the mills of the W^aterbury 
Brass company. The manufactory itself is also popularly known 
as "the Manhan." In the record referred to, "Manhan meadow" 
means " island meadow," and is a precise designation of the piece 
of land lying between the line of the Naugatuck railroad and the 
main channel of the Naugatuck river. Dr. Bronson in his " His- 
tory" says: "There are indications (or used to be) that Manhan 
meadow was once an island, and that a part of the river, at a not 
very distant period, ran down upon the east side next the hill, in 
the course of the canal of the Water Power company, continuing 
through the old ' Long cove ' and along the line of the Naugatuck 
railroad till it met Great brook. This was low ground, and through- 
out its extent there was (in the writer's memory) a chain of minia- 

* See p. 32. 



INDIAN GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. 



S2, 



ture lakes or ponds."* The same name occurs in Easthampton, 
Mass., applied now to a river, and is readily recognized in such 
names as Manhannock, and Manhasset (or Munhansick), but not so 
readily in Montauk, Manhattan and the Grand Menan. In recent 
years, it has been affixed to a Waterbury street — that which runs 
northward from West Main street, between Fairview and Mattatuck 
streets. It is to be regretted that it was not given to the street 
which runs nearest to the "canal," and thus nearest to the "island " 
from which it derives its name. 

Another genuine Indian appellative has survived in the name of 
one of the school-districts of Waterbury, " Oronoke." In the final 
syllable, we recognize the familiar terminal, meaning "place," but 
what particular place within the region extending from West-side 
hill to Middlebury furnished the name which now designates the 
entire district, it would probably be impossible to discover. The 
name occurs in other parts of the state under the varied forms, 
Woronock, Waronoco, and perhaps Orenaug (in Woodbury). 

The only Indian place-name that remains to be mentioned is one 
that belongs to the present town of Wolcott and has been already 
referred to.f On March 31, 1731, John Alcock, of New Haven, 
bought a piece of land in the northeast quarter of Waterbury which 
is described (in the record of that date) as "near Ash swamp or 
Potucko's ring." In an entry in the Land Records for December 3, 
1795, a certain boundary line is described as "crossing Ptuckering 
road, so called," at two different points. This road is now called 
"Tucker's Ring road," and the Indian origin of the name would 
hardly have been suspected, were it not for the connecting links 
which the local records furnish. As we have already seen, Potucko 
was one of the first signers of the first Waterbury deeds ; but whence 
comes the name " Potucko's ring ? " and what is its significance ? 
The traditional explanation is given in Dr. Bronson's "History:" 
" So called from Potucko, an Indian, who having fired a ring of 
brushwood to surround and catch deer and other game, was himself 
entrapped and consumed." J There is nothing essentially improb- 
able in the story, and some slight support for it may be derived 
from the fact (already referred to) that while Potucko's name 
appears among the signatures attached to the deed of April 29, 
1684, it is not among those in the deed of December following, but 
is substittited by that of Potucko's squaw. The fact of the close 

* Bronson's " History of Waterbury," note to p. 96. 
•t- See p. 33. 

$" History of Waterbury," note on p. 462. See also the Rev. Samuel Orcutt's " History of Wolcott," 
note on p. 1P2. 



54 



HISTORY OF WATERS L/ BY. 



connection of the name with the word pctukki, which means 
"round," becomes specially interesting in the light of the tradition 
concerning Potucko's death in a ring. Did the Indian derive his 
name from a practice of hunting deer in the way the tradition 
indicates — as if he were known as "the man of the ring"? Or was 
the story, like some other traditional tales, invented to account for 
the name ? 

To this brief list of names in the Indian language should be 
added some others which, although not of Indian origin, contain 
reminiscences of the Indian period and of Indian occupancy. 

Following again the alphabetical order, we begin with " Jack's 
cave." The old Indian trail betw^een Farmington and the Nauga- 
tuck valley, which afterward became a travelled road, passed through 
the northwest corner of what is now Wolcott. According to tradi- 
tion the road ran close to the place where the dwelling of Mr. Levi 
Atkins now stands, but the Indian trail passed a little further to 
the north, "near a large, shelving rock called Jack's cave," In Mr. 
Orcutt's "History of Wolcott" it is added that "the Indians en- 
camped under this rock at night, in passing between Farmington 
and Woodbury," and that near it stood a large chestnut tree from 
which Mr. Timothy Bradley cut two hundred bullets, shot into it 
by Indians while shooting at a mark. * This does not prove 
conclusively that the Jack of Jack's cave was an Indian ; but, all 
things considered, it is a name which ought probably to be included 
in this list. 

"Spinning wSquaw's land," a locality mentioned in the early 
deeds, and apparently well known in the early days of Waterbury, 
is sufficiently described in the preceding chapter. f 

" The Wigwam " is the name given to a strip of land, a mile long, 
lying on "West branch," which empties into the Naugatuck near 
Reynolds bridge. It is said to have been occupied by an Indian in 
recent years. A small stream which empties into AVest branch is 
known as "Wigwam brook." 

There is another locality in which the memory of a wigwam sur- 
vives. In 1684 the proprietors of Mattatuck granted to Daniel 
Porter " four acres in the Wigwam swamp, as near the lower end as 
may be, so as to have the breadth of the swamp." In a deed bearing 
date a hundred and ten years later (December 3, 1795) we read : 
" Land in the sequester at the west end of ' Wigwam swamp,' so 
called, on the brook which runs out of said swamp into Hancox 
brook " ; and in a later deed : " Land in the northern part of the 

* Orcutt's " Wolcott," p. 197 and note. 
+ See pp. 31, 32. 



INDIAN OEOGRAPHICAL NAMES. ec 

sequester in the First society of Waterbtiry, at the western end of 
'Wigwam swamp/ so called, and lying upon the brook which runs 
out of said swamp into Hancox brook."* It has been suggested 
that Spinning Squaw's land was here, and that it was Spinning 
Squaw's wigwam which gave its name to the swamp. 

"The Old Canoe place " is the name applied to a spot in the Nau- 
gatuck river below Hopeville, behind the house which stands nearlv 
opposite the residence of the late Isaac M. Thomas. There are 
rapids above and below, but here the water is smooth and compara- 
tively deep. It is supposed to have been a place where canoes were 
kept, or where the river was crossed by canoes. 

It may be added in this connection that Mattatuck seems to have 
had its Indian burying ground. It was situated on what is now 
Johnson street, north of Sperry street. 

Reference may be made, in conclusion, to another spot which has 
aboriginal associations connected with it of quite recent date. A 
few rods south of the city line (in Simonsville), on the east side of 
the highway, which here runs close to the river, there is a bit of 
elevated meadow, formerly surrounded by a wood, some trees of 
which still remain. Within the memory of persons now in mature 
life it was the site of a wigwam and the home of a solitary squaw. 
There was a kind of dam across the Naugatuck at this point, and it 
was a good fishing place. f 

* Land Records, Vol. XXV, pp. 302, 407 ; Vol. XXVI, p. 427. 

+ Reference has been made to the fact that in the town of Watertoun, which belonged to ancient Mat- 
tatuck, there is an entire absence of Indian local names. An Indian name has recently been introduced which 
is likely to secure a permanent foothold in the town. The proprietors of " Wattles Pond," desiring to give it 
a more euphonious name, in connection with a plan to make it a place of resort for summer visitors, applied 
to the writer of this chapter for aid in selecting one. Instead of resorting (as is usually the case) to borrow- 
ing, a name was made to order, according to the laws which govern the construction of Indian place-names. 
The pond being a " fine fishing-place " was called IVinm'maug; and is Hkely to be known by that name in 
the time to come. Some future e.\plorer, failing to light upon this statement respecting its origin, may 
regard it as a genuine survival of the aboriginal period. 

( The author cannot refrain from adding here that while the proofs of this chapter were passing through 
his hands, tidings were received of the sudden death of Samuel McLean of Watertown, who is referred to 
in this note, and also of the Rev. Samuel Orcutt, whose " History of Derby" and "History of Wolcott '' 
are quoted above, and who was the author of other voluminous town histories. Both of these gentlemen 
were killed by railroad trains at Bridgeport, within a few days of one another — January 10 and 14, 1893. ) 



CHAPTER V. 

THE "stone age" IN CONNECTICUT STONE IMPLEMENTS, CHIPPED AND 

GROUND — USES TO WHICH THEY WERE APPLIED, IN PEACE AND 

IN WAR PLACES WITHIN MATTATUCK TERRITORY WHERE 

REMAINS OF THE STONE AGE HAVE BEEN FOUND ACCOUNTS OF 

VARIOUS " FINDS " BETWEEN BEACON HILL BROOK AND LITCHFIELD 
IMPLEMENTS DESCRIBED. 

IN Europe the long prehistoric period has been roughly divided 
by archaeologists into three ages — the Stone age, the Bronze 
age and the Iron age. This division, based upon the charac- 
teristics of the prehistoric remains that have been collected, is not 
entirely applicable to the western hemisphere, yet we may speak of 
the aboriginal population of America at the time of the Discovery 
as belonging to the vStone age, and some tribes or families as having 
passed upward into what may be designated the Copper age. The 
Indians of New England were still in the Stone age at the coming 
of the first settlers. They seem to have used to a very limited 
extent implements and weapons of hammered copper, obtained 
through traffic with other tribes, and there is evidence that they 
had learned to make pottery. But their dependence for useful 
implements, for weapons of war and for cooking utensils was 
almost entirely upon stone and wood. 

We should hardly expect articles of wood to resist decay until 
modern times (although in a few instances wooden objects have 
survived), but implements of stone in large numbers lie scattered 
on the surface of the ground to the present day, or imbedded in 
the soil, and are still found, by those who have eyes to see, in 
ploughed fields, on the banks of rivers, along roadsides and in places 
where no one would expect to discover them. These stone imple- 
ments may be divided into two general classes — those made by 
chipping, such as the well-known arrow heads, and those made by 
pecking and grinding, such as celts, axes and pestles. Of these two 
classes, the former is by far the more numerous, although the num- 
ber of axes and other ground implements which have been picked 
up in New England and over all the Atlantic slope during the past 
two hundred years miLst be immense. 

If we knew precisely to what uses the various implements were 
applied, we should be able to reproduce quite fully the life of the 



STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. 57 

aboriginal tribes. But concerning many of the remains there is still 
much uncertainty, after all the study which archaeologists have 
bestowed upon them. We know what the universal needs of the 
Indian were, — to provide for himself and his household sustenance 
and clothing and shelter. We know that the men hunted, that the 
women tilled the ground, that certain games and other amusements 
were indulged in, that religious rites were practiced, and that tribes 
made war upon one another. The remains that have been gathered 
consist of utensils or weapons which had to do with this simple but 
varied round of life; but what particular uses they served it is not 
always easy to say. To the various kinds of stone implements 
names have been confidently attached by collectors, but in all prob- 
ability those names are in many cases erroneous and misleading, — 
although as a matter of convenience they have to be used. In meet- 
ing the simple wants referred to, trees had to be felled (by burning 
or otherwise), posts had to be trimmed and driven, canoes had to be 
dug out, fire-wood to be prepared, deer and smaller game to be shot 
or trapped, fish to be caught in summer and in winter, flesh and fish 
to be boiled or roasted, bones to be cracked for the marrow in 
them, corn and beans to be planted and the ground tilled, skins to 
be scraped and cleaned, enemies to be slain, by arrow or ckib, and 
their 'scalps removed, and the dead to be disposed of by burial or 
otherwise. The stone implements that are found were used, either 
mounted in wood or otherwise, for these various purposes — some 
for one kind of work and some for another; but there was of course 
no such strict application of the tool to its specific purpose as we 
find to-day among skilled workmen. The celt, for instance, or the 
grooved axe, or the large chipped implement, may have been 
applied, like the modern jack-knife or hatchet, to a hundred differ- 
ent uses. 

To a people whose chief means of subsistence were hunting and 
fishing, a region of rapid water-courses and of forests must have 
been specially attractive, while at the same time " interval lands " 
and clearings at the mouths of streams must have had great value 
in their eyes. We can readily believe, therefore, although there 
may have been no tribal seat or central camping-ground within the 
limits of ancient Mattatuck, that the territory was quite constantly 
occupied by wandering bands or family groups, who settled down 
here or there for a season, and then departed to some more prom- 
ising fishing-place, or some bluif commanding a better view of the 
river. At any camping-ground likely to be occupied for a few 
weeks in succession, wigwams would be erected, cooking would be 
gone through with, fire-wood would be provided, soapstone dishes 



S8 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



would be used, fish and game would be got ready for the pot, arrows 
and fish-spears would be made, to take the place of those that had 
been lost or broken, and arrow-heads and spear-heads chipped, to 
supply the constant demand. There are doubtless many spots up 
and down the Naugatuck valley, at the mouths of streams and on 
such bluffs as that on which the Waterbury hospital now stands, 
where these various processes were carried on, year after year, for 
centuries. Some of these spots have already furnished large har- 
vests to the collector of " relics " or to the farmer-boy, while others 
have yet to be discovered. In some parts of our country — notably 
in New Jersey and in Ohio— the collecting of stone implements has 
been engaged in by so many, or systematized to such an extent, 
that definite opinions may safely be expressed in regard to their 
abundance and their relations to different localities. But nothing 
of this kind has been accomplished in the Naugatuck valley; it 
would be impossible to indicate on a map of the region, except in 
the most imperfect way, where camping-grounds were situated, or 
where the arrow-maker's hut may have stood, or where a battle 
with some hostile tribe may have been fought. The abundance of 
small chipped implements at a given place might be explained by 
one collector as the result of a battle, and by another as indicating 
the site of an arrow-maker's workshop, according to the scientific 
training of the collector, his accuracy as an observer and his caution 
in drawing inferences. Kilbourne, in his '' Sketches and Chroni- 
cles of Litchfield," comments in this way upon the chipped 
implements found on the shores of Bantam lake : 

That such battles [between the Litchfield Indians and the "intruding 
Mohawks "] have been fought on the now quiet rural shores of our beautiful lake 
and for a mile or two northw^ard, is clearly indicated by the stone arrow-heads 
which are scattered in such profusion in the soil. It is true they are found in other 
parts of the township, but nowhere in such abundance as in the locality described. 
The writer remembers, as one of the pastimes of his childhood, following in the 
furrows behind the ploughman, on the West plain, for the express purpose of picking 
up these interesting memorials of a by-gone race— then of course regarded simply 
as playthings. These arrow-heads are of various shapes and sizes, and are made 
of different kinds of flint— black, white, red and yellow— showing them to have 
been manufactured by different and probably distant tribes. * 

To the untrained collector it may seem almost a matter of course 
thus to explain the abundance of arrow-heads at a given place by 
supposing a battle to have been fought there; but it may be 
entirely unscientific to do so. There are other hypotheses which 
must be brought into careful comparison with this ere a safe 

*Pp. 64, 65, of "Sketches and Chronicles of the Town of Litchfield. P.y Payne Kenyon Kilbourne, 
M. A.," Hartford, 1859. 



STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. 59 

decision can be reached. So, too, it may seem a natural inference 
from the variety of materials represented in a collection of arrow- 
heads that they were " manufactured by different and probably 
distant tribes," but no such inference can be sustained ; indeed 
there are various facts which go to show that the material of 
which these implements were made was sometimes transported in 
considerable quantities from place to place, and manufactured 
afterward. 

Not only has no systematic exploration of Waterbury territory 
with reference to archaeological traces been made ; it is quite impos- 
sible to give any full account of the remains which have been 
gathered up in the present and in previous generations. The very 
miscellaneous data which follow are simply those that have come to 
the writer's knowledge within a few years past, representing no 
effort at an exhaustive search for " relics " in the field, nor any 
serious attempt to ascertain what may be treasured in private 
collections, or lying around in the garrets and cupboards of farm- 
houses. These memoranda, however, will serve to show how wide- 
spread and general was the aboriginal occupancy of the region, and 
how closely conformed was the life of our Mattatuck predecessors 
to the typical Indian life. 

Beginning at the southern boundary of Mattatuck, that is, at 
Beacon Hill brook, a mile and a half below Naugatuck centre, we 
find traces near the mouth of the brook of what some have called 
an Indian village. The brook is famous as a trout stream ; indeed 
for rods above and below its mouth the Naugatuck river used to be 
"black with fish," and it was with reference to the fishing that the 
" village " was established there. This camping-ground was situ- 
ated on the northern bank of the stream, about forty rods above its 
mouth. Certain details in regard to it were furnished to the writer 
by the late Josiah Culver of Naugatuck (born in 1799), whose 
father, Amos Culver, settled near the mouth of Beacon Hill brook 
previous to 1780. At that time, corn-hills — remains of aboriginal 
planting — were plainly visible, and there were Indians living in 
the neighborhood. Numerous traces of an arrow maker's work- 
shop existed there, and some years ago, in digging a cellar, a large 
quantity of stone "chips" was unearthed. Josiah Culver found a 
stone pipe on this site, and a soapstone dish that would hold two or 
three quarts. In his later life he found a rude "pestle " and a few 
white quartz arrow-heads near his dwelling, on the west side of the 
Naugatuck river. 

About a mile back from the river rises Twelve Mile hill, known 
also as Straight mountain. Here, on a plateau overlooking the 



6o 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 




IMI'I.EMENTS FOUND IX NATGATUCK. 



Naug-atuck valley, is the residence of H. N. Williams. On the level 
surface, ten rods back from the declivity and near a peat swamp, 

Mr. Williams found one 

of the axes figured in 
the accompanying- cut. 
: It is six and a half 
inches long; and three 
and a half wide, nar- 
rowing to the cutting 
edge. It is flat on one 
side, but the groove runs 
entirely around it. It has 
^ been carefully ground in 
the groove and near the 
edge, but not elsewhere. 
Mr. Williams found near the same spot a mallet-like stone, having 
a very artificial look ; but it is probably a natural object. 

The other axe here figured was found in the village of Nauga- 
tuck, and was preserved for many years in the family of the late 
Willard vSpencer, of Waterbury. Its length is six inches. It is very 
slightly grooved, except on the edges, and bears few traces of work. 
It was evidently a natural wedge of fine sandstone, selected because 
of its axe-like shape, and mounted in its handle with as little labor 
as possible. 

The large chipped implement figured in the same cut was also 
found in Naugatuck village, near the river. It is of dark brown 
flint (more properly, chert), and is seven inches long, and seven- 
eighths of an inch thick at the middle, tapering on both sides to a 
nicely chipped edge. 

In the writer's collection are three other implements found in 
Naugatuck, near the river. One of them (presented by the late Cal- 
vin H. Carter) may be regarded as a pestle, although it approxi- 
mates to the form of a blunt chisel. It is eleven inches long. 
Three of its sides are flat; the fourth side rounded. Lying with 
its rounded side up, its heighth is two and a quarter inches, its 
thickness one and three-quarters. One of the ends is rounded, the 
other wedge-shaped, but blunt. The material is a fine sandstone, 
very similar to the axe last described. The second specimen is a 
chipped " hoe " of white quartzite, five inches long. The " blade " is 
three and a half inches wide, the " stem " two and a quarter. It is 
very rough and evidently unfinished. What it would have become 
in the finishing process it is difficult to say. vStill more interesting 
than this is the third implement, which may be described as a small 



STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCE. 6i 

''adze" or a "gouge " designed for mounting in a handle. On one 
side it is flat, except that it is gouge-shaped at the cutting edge. 
The other side is convex, and midway there are two projections, 
with a hollow between them, evidently made to receive a withe 
handle. The tool is five inches long and an inch and three-quarters 
in width. It is of very hard stone, but is symmetrically shaped and 
carefully ground. 

At Bradley ville, northwest of Naugatuck, stone implements 
have been picked up by John Bradley, Isaac Scott, Enoch Newton 
and others, but no details can be given. 

Through the kindness of Dr. Isaac N. Russell the writer's col- 
lection contains a stone axe found at Piatt's Bridge on the Nauga- 
tuck, three miles south of the centre of Waterbury. The stone is 
very compact and heavy and almost black. The length is seven 
and a half inches, the breadth five inches; the thickness above the 
groove two inches and a half. The groove is shallow, and although 
the axe is of a well-defined type it has been made such without the 
expenditure of much labor. The part below the groove is wedge- 
shaped and tapering, and the cutting edge is very nearly a semi- 
circle. Along with the axe came a few arrowheads, and additional 
arrowheads of white quartz were received from the Misses Cowell, _ 
residents of the Piatt's Mills district. 

At Malmanack (or Malmalick), a hill referred to in the previous 
chapter, numerous chipped implements have been found. The Rev. 
Eli B. Clark, in a letter already quoted, says : 

In ray youth, while cultivating the fields on the sides and top of that hill, we- 
often found Indian relics, chiefly arrow-heads of greater or less perfection. I 
should judge that they were from three to five inches in length, some very slim 
and sharp, others larger and moi-e blunt, intended probably for larger game. We 
often found them broken, but some were apparently as perfect as when used by 
the red man in slaughtering his game. 

It was very pleasing to us boys to find these relics of a former race, and we 
carefully treasured them up, for the time being, as curiosities. I have a vague 
recollection that something we called the Indian hatchet was occasionally found, 
but of this I could not affirm positively. 

The locality of the arrow-heads was confined chiefly to the hill; I scarcely recol- 
lect finding any on other parts of our farm, which extended quite a distance in all 
directions. I do not thmk that the question why the arrow-heads were confined to 
that particular spot was much agitated in those days. Whether the Indians came 
there for the outlook, or for game, or for some other reason, was not satisfactorily 
settled, if indeed it has been since, or ever will be. The hill was evidently a 
favorite camping ground, where much time must have been spent; otherwise it is 
not easy to account for the loss of so many weapons of the chase. 

As far to the east of the Naugatuck as Malmanack is to the west, 
rises the height known as East mountain, near the bounds of 



62 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Prospect. This is represented in the writer's collection by a hand- 
some black spear-head. At Prospect centre, on ground high 
enough to command a view of Long Island sound, the writer 
secured an interesting stone "mortar," probably of aboriginal 
manufacture, which now rests under a tree near his cottage at 
Woodmont. The material is a compact, yellowish brown sandstone. 
It is without definite form, but approximates to an oval. It is 
twenty-three inches in length, eighteen in breadth, and six in 
thickness. The excavation is three inches at its greatest depth and 
slopes gradually to the top. The longer diameter of the excavation 
lies across the stone and measures seventeen inches. Its width is 
fourteen inches, so that there is a flat margin on one side of it, 
measuring several inches across. This may have been a mortar in 
which to grind corn. If so, the "pestle" must have been used 
horizontally, that is, rolled. But the excavation does not afford 
much evidence of use. * 

Returning to the Naugatuck river, a little above the point at 
which Mad river empties into it, we find a spot productive of arrow- 
heads where the office of the Benedict & Burnham Manufacturing 
company now stands. Here was the home of the late Joseph P. 
vSom.ers. from whose daughters, Mrs. Stephen E. Harrison and Mrs. 
Douglas F. Maltby, the writer has received collections of arrow and 
spear-heads— the arrow-heads, as usual, being mostly of white 
quartz. They were picked up, years ago, in the garden connected 
with the old homestead. 

In the autumn of 1892, some laborers who were digging a cellar 
near the corner of East Main and Silver streets in Waterbury came 
upon a number of arrow-heads. A short distance to the east of this, 
on the Meriden road, are two curious depressions, formerly filled 
with water, known as the Spectacle ponds.f Some years ago, in one 
of these ponds or "kettle holes"— that on the south side of the road 
— a curious and interesting discovery was made, not only represent- 
ing aboriginal life, but bearing upon the question of the antiquity 
of man in this region. The workmen of Mr. D. G. Porter, while 
digging muck and peat from the bottom of the pond, came upon a 
number of pieces of wood bearing unquestionable evidence of hav- 
ing been cut with a blunt instrument. Some of the sticks were pine, 

*The writer recalls with no little amusement the prolonged effort put forth to secure this "relic" from 
its putative owner. It lay at the time in a barn yard, filled with ice, having been set apart as a watering 
trough for fowls. But the farmer's son, as soon as he was asked to sell, conceived a strong attachment for it. 
"My grandfather," he said, "found it and brought it home a hundred years ago, and people have come 
miles to see it." When finally persuaded to name his price, he said, with much deliberation, " I shall have 
to ask you twenty-five cents for it." "Well, I am willing to give you twenty-five cents for it," the col- 
lector quietly replied ; and he then and there began to appreciate for the first time the high estimate 
which the hill-top farmer puts upon a quarter of a dollar. 

+ These are described and their origin explained in chap. I, pp. 8, 9. 



STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. 63 

some white birch, and measured two inches in diameter. Others 
showed unmistakable traces of fire, as did also the stones that were 
found with them. The remarkable thing about these remains (now 
in the writer's possession) is that they were found at a depth of fif- 
teen feet below the surface. To establish approximately their date, 
we must not only go back to a time when the Spectacle ponds were 
dry ground, but must reckon the rate at which black earth is 
formed by the annual deposit of leaves, and the rate also of the 
formation of peat through the growth and decay of peat-moss. It 
has been estimated that in a country overgrown with forests of 
beach, oak and chestnut, where there is annually a vast deposit of 
dead leaves, the increase in the depth of the soil is " one one-hun- 
dred and twenty-eighth of an inch per annum," or one inch in a 
hundred and twenty-eight years.* At this rate, to deposit a stratum 
of soil fifteen feet in thickness would require more than twenty- 
three thousand years. vSuch estimates are of a hap-hazard character 
at best; but even if such a rate as this could be established for a 
wooded region and a level surface, it would serve but poorly as a 
measure of the time required for the deposition of earth and muck 
and peat in a glacial "kettle hole." We must make large allowance 
for the accumulation of fallen leaves in such an excavation; and for 
the washing in of sand and refuse by heavy rains. But after all 
such deductions are made, the depth at which the remains at Spec- 
tacle pond were found is remarkable. A variety of hypotheses 
might be suggested to account for their position; but those who 
believe that man existed in North America during the last glacial 
period or soon afterward, will find here new evidence in support of 
their opinion. 

Coming westward again to the centre of the city, and going a 
short distance up Prospect street, we are at the residence of Mr. 
Luther C. White— the house next north of Trinity church. In dig- 
ging the cellar of this house, some years ago, a "relic" was found 
more interesting than any other that has thus far been discovered 
in ancient Mattatuck. It is the pipe with a face and figure upon it 
pictured on page 38. This pipe is of fine, dark green steatite, so 
dark that it is almost black. The stem is four and a half inches 
long, half an inch wide, and five-eighths of an inch thick. The 
bowl is two inches and three-quarters in depth; the diameter across 
the top is seven-eighths of an inch, and the diameter of the bore 
three-eighths. On the upper side of the stem is a recumbent female 
figure, the right arm alongside of the body, the left arm across 
the chest. Each hand has three fingers which are spread apart 

*Dr. C. C. Abbott on the "Antiquity of the Indians of North America," in T/te American Naturalist 
for February, 1876 (Vol. X, p. 67). 



64 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



like the claws of a bird. The figure is three inches and a half in 
length, and a little broader than the stem upon which it rests. On 
the upper part of the bowl, facing the smoker, is a carefully carved 
man's face, an inch and three-eighths in length. The ears are per- 
forated, and the eyes are either closed or directed downward to the 
recumbent figure on the stem. There is a slight projection or ring- 
around the top of the bowl, and another similar ridge around the 
stem, half an inch from the end. The pipe is carefully carved and 
beautifully polished throughout, and taken as a whole is far superior 
to the average handiwork of the New England Indians. Artistically 
and in its workmanship it bears some resemblance to the pipes of 
the Ohio valley Mound Builders, — although if it were a mound pipe, 
it might not be easy to explain how it reached the Naugatuck val- 
ley during the aboriginal period. But if we may judge from what 
some of the early writers have said concerning the skill of the New 
England Indians, such work as that displayed in this Waterbury 
pipe was not altogether beyond their reach. John Josselyn, in his 
" Two Voyages to New England," enumerating articles of Indian 
manufacture, mentions " tobacco pipes of stone, with images upon 
them;"* and Wood, in his "New England's Prospect," speaking of 
the things which the ^Massachusetts Indians obtain from the Narra- 
gansetts, says : 

From hence they have their great stone pipes which will hold a quarter of an 
ounce of tobacco, which they make with steel drills and other instruments. Such 
is their ingenuity and dexterity that they can imitate the English mold so accu- 
rately that, were it not for matter and color, it were hard to distinguish them. They 
make them of green and sometimes of black stone. They be much desired of our 
English tobacconists for their rarity, strength, handsomeness and coolness. f 

So closely does this description correspond at some points with 
the Waterbury pipe that we might easily suppose the author had it 
before him while he wrote. Very probably its Mattatuck owner 
obtained it by traffic rather than by manufacture, but with such 
facts before us as these furnished by Wood we need not suppose that 
it came from the Ohio valley or from any tribe more remote than 
the Narragansetts. And what Wood says in regard to the use of 
steel drills suggests that this and other articles of aboriginal manu- 
facture may belong to the period subsequent to the first coming of 
Europeans. At any rate, it is difficult to believe that such work 
could have been done without metal tools — without the " steel drills " 
of the English, or the copper instruments of the Mound Builders. 

The streets next west of Prospect street, namely, Central and 
Holmes avenues, rtm northward across land formerly owned by the 
late Samuel J. Holmes. On that part of the land now crossed by 



*P. Ill, reprint of 1865. + Part 2, chap. 3 ; p. 69, reprint of 1S65. 



STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. 



65 



Central avenue there were formerly several places which afforded 
evidence of early (perhaps aboriginal) excavations. The several 
depressed areas varied in extent from six to twelve feet square, and 
in two of them charcoal was found, with other traces of fire and also 
flat stones. Near the centre of the land, where Holmes avenue now 
is, was formerly a low bluff, with springs at its base. Mr. Israel 
Holmes reports that arrow-heads, mostly of white quartz, used to 
be found here in considerable numbers. 

Mr. Israel Holmes's present residence, " Westwood," stands on a 
beautiful plateau on the west side of the river, overlooking- the 
extensive meadows of the Naugatuck. Here also many arrow- 
heads and larger chipped implements have been found, and on the 
north side of the house traces of an arrow-maker's work-shop are 
constantly occurring. Mr. Holmes's collection of "relics" picked 
up about the house and in the garden contains twenty or thirty 
white quartz arrow-heads, several of flint and of red sandstone, two 
"pestles," two interesting fragments of soapstone dishes and two 
implements evidently designed to be mounted as hoes and probably 
used in cultivating corn. 

On the bluff next north of Mr. Holmes, where the house of Mr. 
Loren R. Carter now stands, arrow-heads are still picked up. On 
Hospital bluff, a little distance to the south, some interesting pieces 
have been found, among which are those here represented. 

The soapstone dish was given to the writer some 3-ears ago by 
the late C. B. Merriman. Its general outline is triangular, but the 
corners are rounded off so much that it is almost circular. Its 
length, not reckoning 
the projecting handles, 
is eight inches, its great- 
est breadth seven inches ,^,„ 
and its height four. The 
excavation is so shallow 
— less than two inches — 
and it is upon the whole 
so rude, that it may be 
supposed to have been 
left in an unfinished j 
state, and perhaps never 
used. The chipped im- 
plements figured in the soapstone dish and chuted implements, hospital blukf, 

cut were received from wateup.uky. 

the late A. B. Wilson, the famous inventor of the Wheeler & 
Wilson sewing machine, who built the house which has since 
become the Waterbury hospital. They were found by him at the 

5 




66 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



time the cellar of his house was dug. They are each three inches 
long, of a greenish gray chert. One of them has been worked quite 
symmetrically; the other, which is but little more than a semi-circu- 
lar flake, smooth^on one side and chipped on the other, may have 
been used as a " scraper " for cleaning skins, or may be regarded as 
an unfinished spear-head. 

On the high ground south of Hospital bluff and just north of 
Sunnyside avenue, on the land which has been set apart as a 
"town" cemetery, the large axe figured in the following cut was 
dug up a few years ago by Mr. S. M. Judd. He found it in digging 
a grave, at a depth of four feet below the surface. This specimen is 
interesting as illustrating the ease with which the primitive man 
could on occasion provide himself with necessary tools. The " axe " 
is but little more than a large wedge-shaped flake of compact sand- 
stone. It is eight inches long, is square across the top, showing the 
natural cleavage, is an inch and a quarter thick on one side and 
tapers to half an inch on the other. It is nicked, not grooved, and 
is rudely chipped on the thin side. It is not so much an unfinished 
implement as one that was fitted for a withe handle by a few 
minutes' labor, and afterward cast aside. 

The lively stream w^hich tumbles down between the Hospital 
grounds and the land north of the town cemetery is known as vSled 
Hall brook. On the old Town Plot road near this brook arrow-heads 
have recently been found, and — wiiat is of more interest — several 
fragments of aboriginal pottery bearing traces of decoration, the de- 
sign being that which is sometimes described as the basket pattern. 
Some distance to the northwest of this last named locality, and 
alongside of the Middlcbury road, lies a large swamp, bounded on 

the northeast by a ledge 
of rocks crowned with 
large trees. On the edge 
of the swamp, close to 
the rocks, the soap-stone 
dish figured in the ad- 
joining cut was found by 
the late Isaac Boughton, 
and deposited by him in 
the writer's collection. 
Its length, not including 
the projecting handles, 
• is eight inches and a 

DISH, AXES AND " CHUNGKE STONE," WATERBURY. half, ItS wldth Slx aud S. 

half. Its general shape is a rectangle, with rounded corners and 
bulging sides. The bottom is not 'flat, so that it is higher at one 




STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. 



67 



end than at the other. The excavation measures six and a half 
inches by five and a quarter, and is two and a half inches deep. 
The material is a coarse soap-stone of very light color. Although 
a good deal of work has been laid out upon it, taken as a whole it 
is unshapen and clumsy. 

Near the swamp just referred to, a well-known road branches 
from the main highway and passes through what is called the Park. 
Beyond the Park, on high ground overlooking the road from 
Naugatuck to Watertown, lives Mr. Thomas Lockwood, who has 
picked up on his little farm some very pretty arrow and spear 
heads. A mile or two north of there, on this same Naugatuck and 
Watertown road, a little to the northwest of " Bunker Hill," is the 
residence of Mr. Charles Cooper. With the exception of the large 
spear-head, the specimens figured in the following cut were picked 
up within a short distance of Mr. Cooper's house. The spear-head 
was obtained from Mr. Stephen Atwood, at the sawmill on Wattles 
brook. It is over five inches long, of a dark gray chert, and very 




SPECIMENS FOUND NEAR BUNKER HILL. 



neatly chipped. Of the sixty pieces in the Cooper collection^ten 
are of dark chert, one (at the centre of the cut) of yellowish brown 
flint, and another (the large one directly below it) of light gray 
flint, flecked with white. The rest are of white quartz, one of them 
very transparent. Great pains were evidently taken with this, but 
it was probably broken in the making. Most of the arrow-heads 
are perfect, but thick and clumsy. 

The soapstone dish figured on the next page is said to have 
been dug up in building the Watertown branch of the Naugatuck 
railroad. It is of the same general character as that received from 



68 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY 



Mr. Boughton, but larger and less smoothly finished. It is ten 
inches long and about eight inches wide. The projecting handles 
are large and strong. Although the dish is six inches high, the 
depth of the excavation is less than two inches; so that it is very 
heavy. The entire surface bears the marks of the pecking tool. 

The pestle here figured was found in the village of Watertown, 
and was presented to the writer by Dr. Isaac X. Russell. It is seven- 
teen inches long and almost cylindrical in form, its diameter being 

two inches at one end 
— ] 

and an inch and a half 

at the other. The sides 

are smooth and exhibit 

signs of use; the ends 

are rounded, but not 

smooth. The material 

is a compact and hard 

argillite, of a reddish 

brown color. 

For some years past 

an agricultural fair has 

been held annuallv at 




I'ESTLE AND SOAPSTONE DISH FROM WATERTOWN. 



Watertown, at which 
from time to time stone implements have been exhibited. At the 
fair held in June, 1880, an interesting collection was exhibited by 
Mr. Frederick Judd, consisting chiefly of implements found in the 
northern part of the town, ill the district known as Garnsej^town. 
On Mr. Judd's farm, which is separated from the valley of the 
Naugatuck by a high ridge, there is a " bog-meadow pond," drained 
by the Shepaug river. Most of the pieces in Mr. Judd's collection 
were found near that. It includes a number of arrow-heads and 
spear-heads, among which a white leaf-shaped spear-head is 
specially worthy of mention, a small celt, a gouge, three " pestles " 
of medium length (one of them flat), and one pestle specially 
noteworthy because of its size and shape. It is very symmetrical 
and is twenty-three inches in length.* 

If we return to the centre of Waterbury and go out from there 
in a different direction from that in which we have thus far pro- 



*The large " chopping-knife " of semi-lunar form, pictured in the above cut, was obtained by the 
writer from Mr. Judd's collection, but is understood to have been found in Derby. It is of light-brown slate, 
lias smooth sides, and in its best days had a good cutting edge. It is nearly seven inches long and 
measures two and a half inches across the middle. The rounded back, which strengthens the knife and 
makes it convenient to handle, is about an inch in diameter. Taken as a whole it is a fine specimen of a 
comparatively rare instrument, and if it was found in Derby its manufacture may safely be attributed to the 



Paugasuck Indians. 



STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCIC 69 

ceeded — to the northeast rather than the northwest — we come at 
once upon an interesting site, near the corner of Cooke and Grove 
streets. Here, where the venerable brothers Edward and Nathan 
Cooke lived side by side for many years, the channel of Little brook 
is still visible, although walled in on both banks. In the garden 
which slopes upward from the brook toward the northwest, Mr. 
Walter H. Cooke has from time to time picked up perfect or imper- 
fect arrow-heads and numerous chips. Of the arrow-heads in his 
collection, twenty-five were found on the "home lot." 

A third of a mile further on, we reach the foot of Burnt hill, 
where Dr. Amos S. Blake, some years ago, picked up the grooved 
axe represented in the cut on page 66. Through Dr. Blake's kind- 
ness, it now belongs to the writer's collection. It was found on the 
roadside in a populous part of the city, where it had lain unob- 
served by passers by for perhaps two hundred years. It is six 
inches long and four wide, and is divided into two nearly equal 
parts by a well wrought and deep groove. Below the groove it is 
more than two inches thick, and tapers rapidly to a cutting edge. 
The upper end is flat and unworked; there is in fact no trace of 
work upon the axe except in the groove and on the edge. It is of 
trap rock, very heavy for its size, and rather clumsy. 

In the same cut (on page 66) is figured a bi-concave discoidal 
stone very similar in its general character to the so-called 
" chungke stones " found in the southern states. It is round and 
quite symmetrical, is three and a half inches in diameter and an 
inch and three-quarters in thickness near the circumference. The 
depth of the concavity is three-eighths of an inch, and is about the 
same on both sides. The rim is slightly convex and the edges are 
rounded ofi:. In one or two spots it shows traces of polishing. 
Elsewhere, except in the concavities, it bears the marks of the 
pecking tool. The material is yellow sienite. This stone was pre- 
sented to the writer by Mr. Charles R. Tyler, of Buck's hill, who is 
a grandson of David Warner and a descendant of John Warner, one 
of the first settlers of the town. It was in the Warner family for 
many years, and is believed by Mr. Tyler to have been found in 
Waterbury. Such stones, though of frequent occurrence in the 
south, are rare in the northern states. Dr. C. C. Abbott, in his 
"Primitive Industry," which refers chiefly to the "Northern Atlan- 
tic seaboard," has a chapter on discoidal stones, but it is very short, 
the northern specimens which had come under his observation hav- 
ing evidently been very few. The game of "chungke," of which 
the southern and southwestern Indians were passionately fond, is 
described by James i\dair as he saw it, a hundred and fifty years 



70 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



ago, and more fully by C. C. Jones, in his work on southern antiqui- 
ties.* The writer is not aware of any references to it in authors 
who have described the New Engiand Indians, but the game may 
have existed among them without being so prominent as among the 
southern tribes. If the stone here figured is a Connecticut speci- 
men, and not a modern importation, its existence may be accepted 
as evidence that " chungke " was played in ancient ]^Iattatuck, — 
although it is of course possible that this was an implement 
designed for some entirely different purpose. 

That part of ancient Mattatuck which lies to the east and north- 
east of Buck's hill, now embraced in the town of Wolcott, is prob- 
ably as well stocked with prehistoric specimens as the rest of the 
territory, but the writer is not informed in regard to discoveries in 
that quarter. Wolcott is represented in his collection by a few 
specimens secured throiigh the late Samuel Orcutt. One of these 
is a grooved axe of sicnite, of rather neat form, six inches long and 
three and a half wide. A deep and polished groove divides it near 
the middle. Below the groove it is carefully worked, but there is 
little trace of work above. There is a well-defined notch in the 
top, of more recent workmanship than the rest. 

In the village of Waterville, two miles above Waterbury centre, a 
number of interesting specimens have been found. At the 
southern end of the village, on a small stream named Mack's brook, 
Mr. Heber Welton has found a number of arrow-heads. Mr. G. W. 
Tucker reports " the oldest inhabitant " as stating that there i:sed 
to be an Indian camp on the banks of ]\Iack's brook, that the 
Indians were drawn there by the abundance of fish, and that at 
certain seasons the stream was full of salmon. Mr. Welton has 
found in this vicinity several pestles, one of them in the bed of 
the river. 

The writer's collection contains an interesting and shapely imple- 
ment taken from Factory pond in Waterville. It is six inches long, 
and an inch and three-quarters wide in its widest part. It may 
perhaps be classed with stone chisels, but is flat on one side and 
handsomely rounded en the other. At the upper end it tapers to a 
blunt point, and the cutting edge measures about an inch. It has 
lain so long in the water that it is difficult to say of what kind of 
stone it is made. 

Across the river from Waterville is the home of Mr. Joseph Wel- 
ton, sheltered on the northwest by a ridge which runs in a south- 
westerly direction as far as the Waterbury almshouse. Mr. Welton 



* Jones's " Antiquities of tlie Southern Indians," pp. 341-35S ; Adair's " American Indians," pp. 401, 402; 
Abbott's " Primitive Industry." pp. 341-343. 



STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUVK. 71 

has picked up around his house a number of arrow-heads and other 
chipped implements, some of which he has contributed to the 
writer's collection. Among these is a semi-lunar knife of slate, 
similar to that already described, but sinaller and somewhat imper- 
fect, and evidently very old. Some years ago, while working the 
road near the almshotise, Mr. Welton came upon the grave of an 
Indian child. The skeleton was in a sitting posture. The skull, 
taken from the earth in a somewhat fragmentary condition, was 
sent to a friend in a neighboring town. But Mr. Welton reserved 
for himself, and afterward gave to the writer, certain objects which 
make the " find " one of peculiar interest. These are toy imple- 
ments, four in number, some idea of which may be obtained from 
the accompanying cut. One is a diminutive celt, two inches and a 
quarter long and three quarters of an t 

inch wide at the cutting edge. Another, 

two inches and five eighths in length, I 

might be considered a miniature pestle, 
were it not that at one end it is wedge- 
shaped. Of the other two pieces, one 
is axe-shaped, the other nearly square. 
The latter measures an inch and a half 
on each side, and neither of them is 
more than an eighth of an inch in thick- 
ness. That these two were designed 
for toy pendants ("gorgets," as they are 
sometimes called) is evident from the 
fact that a perforation had been begun 
in each. The objects possess a unique 

interest; associated as they were with toy im.lements fkom a child's grave. 
the remains of a child, they help us to bring vividly before us what 
may be called the home life of our aboriginal predecessors. There 
is nothing to forbid our thinking of these buried trifles as the 
handiwork of some fond father or elder brother, unfinished at the 
moment of the child's death and deposited in his grave by a 
mother's hand. 

A short distance above Waterville, at Hinchliffe's bridge, there 
is a ledge called the Deer-steak rocks. In this ledge, near the river, 
there is a rock-shelter, open to the south, the "roof" of which pro- 
jects ten or twelve feet. In the spring of 1881, Mr. John Stevens, 
digging here, picked up within a space ten feet square about sixty 
arrow and spear heads, perfect or broken. Most of them are of 
white quartz, some of them carefully finished. Three or four are 
of a bluish flint-like stone, and one of these is two and a quarter 




-2 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

inches in leng-th. A fragment of pottery was also found, bearing- 
traces of a simple decoration; also three fragments of a perforated 
article, apparently the remains of a large pipe of European manu- 
facture. 

Some distance further north, on the Thomaston road, just above 
Jericho bridge, there is a bluff, now under cultivation, where quanti- 
ties of quartz chips are ploughed up. They can be traced sometimes 
the whole length of a furrow, and may pretty certainly be regarded 
as indicating the place of an arrow-maker's open-air work-shop.* 

A little further up the river, at Reynolds bridge, on the west 
side, is the residence of Mr. H. F. Reynolds. It stands on a plateau 
overlooking the river and the road. On the slope near his house, 
and on the strip of meadow between the road and the river, Mr. 
Reynolds has picked up arrow-heads and numerous chips. In his 
small collection is one of the finest specimens the Naugatuck val- 
ley has thus far produced. It is a beautiful leaf-shaped speai'-head, 
five inches long and three inches wide. Its outline is symmetrical, 
the edge is carefully chipped, and the color is milk-white. 

In the writer's collection Thomaston is represented by a single 
specimen. It is an axe, very similar in outline to the sole of a shoe. 
The length is six and a quarter inches, the width, just below the 
groove, two inches and a half, whence it narrows gradually to the 
cutting edge. The groove, which is shallow, is within an inch and 
a half of the top. 

About a mile and a half above Thomaston, on the eastern bank 
of the river, there used to be a factory and a few houses, bearing 
the name of Heathenville. The writer was informed by the late 
Horace Johnson that in his boyhood he used to find arrow-heads 
and quantities of stone chips at this place. The ground close to 
the water's edge was full of chips, mostly black. 

vSome years ago, in the Litchfield correspondence of the JVatcr- 
hiiry American, appeared the following paragraph: 

In a late issue, you speak of a discovery of soapstone dishes, in Rhode Island. 
There are plenty of them nearer home. I have in my possession a bushel or so of 

* About a mile above Jericho bridge, on the east side of the road, which here runs very near the river, is 
a so-called Indian mortar. It is an excavation in the rock, close to the road. The rock, which is a stratum 
of mica-slate, dipping to the northwest, is broken away across the mouth, so that the east side of the hole, 
next the bank, is much higher than the side next the road. The excavation is nearly circular, and is twenty- 
one inches in diameter. The depth of the main "shaft," measured on the side next the bank, is two feet; 
measured from the level of the road, it is eight inches. But within and below this there is another hollow, 
fourteen inches by six, and five inches deep. The stratification of the rock is easily discerned throughout 
the cavity. That it was ever used by the Indians as a mortar (for gnnd ng corn), there is no reason to sup- 
pose. An Indian trail may have run close by it, but the conditions favorable for the establishment of a vil- 
lage or camping-ground are altogether wanting here. Under almost any circumstances the excavation would 
have been inconvenient to use as a " mortar." It is undoubtedly of natural rather than artificial origin, and 
is what geologists term a pot-hole. It would not have been worth while to describe it so fully, except that 
tradition has so long regarded it as of Indian origin. 



STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. 73 

fragments of such dishes, and know of two localities where the soapstone was 
quarried and manufactured. The dishes are very commonly in use among the 
farmers here, for washing hands, etc. 

Having learned that the correspondent from whom this statement 
came was D. C. Kilbourne, Esq., of East Litchfield, the writer, 
accompanied by Mr. H. F. Bassett, called on him, and tinder his 
guidance visited one of the prehistoric manufactories of soapstone 
dishes which he had discovered. This manufactory, or open-air 
work-shop, is situated near " Watch hill," on Spruce brook, a beauti- 
ful stream which empties into the Naugatuck a mile and a cjuarter 
below the East Litchfield railroad station. Mr. Kilbourne had gath- 
ered his large assortment of broken dishes from a strip of meadow- 
land lying along the left bank of the brook. A new examination of the 
same ground brought to light many more fragments, of all sizes and 
shapes, most of them evidently representing dishes that had never 
been finished but were broken in the making. They were covered 
outside and inside with tool-marks, and all of them were very 
rough. In some cases the projecting handles showed a nearer 
approach to completion than any other part of the dish. Of the ' 
specimens collected, that which comes nearest to being a perfect 
dish is noteworthy for its diminutive size. It is only four inches 
and a half in length, and three inches high. It is conformed to the 
regular type, the projecting handles not being lacking; but it is so 
small that one can not help asking to what use, in cooking or eating, 
the red man could have put it. 

The broken dishes were interesting — sufficiently so to justify 
carrying away a large quantity of them; but a more important dis- 
covery was yet to be made. The writer, going back and forth over 
the ploughed ground, picked up a piece of quartzite which bore 
marks of chipping. He soon found another and another, and very 
readily discovered their character : they were the tools used in 
shaping and hollowing out the soapstone dishes. Before his explor- 
ation was ended he had collected sixty of these stone tools, twenty- 
five or thirty of which were closely conformed to a well-defined 
type. They measure from three and a half inches to five inches in 
length, and in size and shape resemble a man's clenched fist,— sup- 
posing the thumb instead of being turned inward to be extended 
and to rest against the forefinger. The end of the tool represented 
by the top of the thumb is in each case chipped to a point, and the 
larger end is chipped and rounded in a more careless way. In addi- 
tion to the unbroken tools, numerous fragments were found, and a 
half bushel of quartzite chips, besides two or three good arrow- 
heads. In the brook quartzite pebbles like those from which the 



74 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



tools were formed could easily be gathered. A few other tools were 
found of a different character. One of them is of mica-slate, one 
end of it remaining in its original condition, the other end reduced 
by chipping to such a size that it can readily be grasped by the 
hand. It is, in short, a rude beetle, about a foot long. Two other 
pieces, pointed like the quartzite tools, are of entirely different 
material and form. One of them is eight inches in length; of the 
other only the pointed end remains. 

The region in which this prehistoric manufactory was situated 
abounds in seams and quarries of soapstone. There is a quarry near 
the top of Chestnut hill in the southwestern part of Torrington, 
which has been worked of late years, says Orcutt,* "with fairly 
remunerative success." About a mile east of this, the stone crops 
out again. There is another quarry in Litchfield, and ledges of 
soapstone on Bunker hill, Waterbury. In the edge of the wood, 
near the site of the vSpruce brook " workshop," there are excava- 
tions from which some of the material used by the Indians was 
evidently obtained. f 

No thorough exploration was made by the writer and his com- 
panions with reference to the sources whence the Indians obtained 
the material for their dishes. It may be that soapstone quarries as 
interesting as those discovered within recent years near Provi- 
dence, R. I., and in Amelia county, Va., may be awaiting some 
enterprising explorer in the vicinity of Spruce brook, or else- 
where in the Naugatuck valley. 



To these memoranda concerning " relics " found in ancient Mat- 
tatuck may be added brief accounts of two others, belonging outside 
of Waterbury territory, but close to its borders, which for obvious 
reasons are likely to be of interest to readers of Waterbury history. 

In the autumn of 1834, a piece of "aboriginal sculpture" was 
unearthed in the town of Litchfield, which is thus noticed by the 
Enquirer of October 2d, of that year: 

A discovery of a singular carved stone image or bust, representing the head, 
neck and breast of a human figure, was made a few daj^s since, on the Bantam 
river, about forty or fifty rods above the mill-dam, half a mile east of this village. 

* " History of Torrington," p. 176. 

+ At several houses in the vicinity large slabs of soapstone, more or less carefully worked, and soapstone 
" mortars,'' were found. As Mr. Kilbourne indicated in the A>itericait. some of these were doing service as 
wash-bowls. The writer brought home with him one of these mortars, measuring seventeen inches by 
twelve. The hollow, which is nearly circular, is eight inches in diameter and three inches deep. In the 
door-yard of a farm-house he found a large slab in which three basins had been hollowed out. The stone is 
more than three feet long, two feet and nine inches wide at one end and two feet at the other, and ten 
inches thick. One of the bowls is si.xteen inches in diameter, another nine, and another six. It is not at all 
probable that such stones as these were "got out'' and shaped by the aborigines; they are doubtless the 
product of white men's industry at a period when dishes of any kmd were scarce. 



STONE IMPLEMENTS OF MATTATUCK. 



IS 



Some boys happened to discover near the banks the head of the figure projecting 
above the ground, which so excited their curiosity that they immediately dug it 
out and conveyed it to the mill, where it is for the present deposited The image, 
which is apparently that of a female, is carved from a rough block of the common 
granite, some part of which is considerably decayed and crumbh', yet must have 
required more patient and persevering labor than generally belongs to the char- 
acter of the natives ; and though in point of skill and taste it falls something short 
of Grecian perfection, it is certainly " pretty well for an Indian." For what pur 
pose it was intended — whether as an idol for worship, or the attempt of some fond 
admirer to preserve and immortalize the lovely features of his dusky fair one, or 
whether it was merely a contrivance of some long-sighted wag of old to set us 
Yankees a guessing, or even whether it is one hundred or five hundred years old — 
all is unrevealed; though no doubt some tale is hanging thereby, if we could only 
find it out. All our American antiquities have this interesting peculiarity, that we 
know nothing of their history. We have not even the twilight of fabulous story to 
relieve our curiosity. The past is hidden in deeper obscurity than the future. 

This account is reproduced in P. K. Kilbourne's " Sketches." Mr. Kil- 
bourne adds: "This curious relic is now preserved in the cabinet of 
Yale College." * J. W. Barber, in his " Historical Collections of Con- 
necticut," says: " It is a rude sculpture of brown stone, nearly the 
size of life, representing a female, with head and shoulders, extend- 
ino- down to the waist. It is now deposited at Yale College, New 
Haven." f 

In January, 1879, inquiry was made of Mr. C. H. Farnam, then 
curator of the archaeological department of the Peabody Museum, 
New Haven, in reference to this aboriginal relic, and the following 
reply was received: 

I have endeavored this morning to find some trace of the statue you speak of. 
About 1S20, the College turned over to an institution called the "New Haven 
Museum " all their collection of relics. Upon the failure of this enterprise, the 
collections were sold, the best specimens going to Boston; but to what museum I 
can not learn. I suppose the specimen you refer to was among the articles so 
disposed of, but have no record of it. I have also seen Mr. John W. Barber, but 
he does not recollect where he heard of the statue. It may be in the Boston 
Museum, and it might be worth while writing to the owners — though in a show 
collection of that kind there is probably no one who knows about the particular 
specimens. I am sorry on my own account, as well as yours, that I cannot give 
you definite information. 

The other relic is of wood, and is said to have been the war-club 
of Pomperaug, a sachem of the Pootatucks. It is a weapon of 
uncertain age, evidently old, but in a state of good preservation. 
Its entire length, head and handle included, is two feet and nine 
inches. The handle is two feet and two inches long; is two inches 
thick near the head, tapering to one inch, and is without bark. The 
head is about six inches in diameter. The club is simply a branch 

* p. K. Kilbourne's " Sketches and Chronicles of the Town of Litchfield," Hartford, 1859; P ^5- 
t P. 456, first edition. 



76 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

of a tree, apparently buttonwood — from the lower end of which, at 
a point where another branch shot out, two large excrescences had 
developed. The two excrescences have grown together on one side, 
constituting a large knot, upon which the bark still remains. The 
branch seems to have been cut from its tree by a hatchet, but the 
small end of the handle shows obvious traces of a saw. 

This interesting relic was presented to the writer by Mrs. Emily 
Goodrich Smith, daughter of the well known S. G. Goodrich (" Peter 
Parley ") and widow of Nathaniel vSmith of Woodbury. Mrs. 
vSmith, in a letter accompanying her gift, dated September 17, 1891, 
assigns its ownership to Pomperaug, "an early distinguished chief 
of the Pootatucks," and says that "an aged squaw, visiting the 
burial places of her tribe, gave this club of her ancestor and chief 
to Nathaniel Smith, Esq., over fifty years ago."* 

With the facts before us which Mrs. Smith mentions, it can not 
be doubted that the club is a genuine Indian relic. But it must be 
acknowledged that the tradition which ascribes its ownership to a 
Pootatuck chief named Pomperaug is open to question. Dr. J. 
H. Trumbull, in his "Indian Names of Places," speaks of Pomeraug 
as follows: 

Local tradition derives the name from a Potatuck sagamore whose fort was on or 
near" Castle Rock " in Woodbury; but no evidence to support this derivation has 
been found in the town or colony records, and the form of the name makes it cer 
tain that it originally belonged to a place, not to a person. A heap of stones in the 
village of Woodbury is supposed to mark the grave of Pomperaug, on which, says 
Mr. Cothren, "each member of the tribe, as he passed that way, dropped a small 
stone, in token of his respect for the fame of the deceased." Such memorial stone- 
heaps were common in New England. From the one in Woodbury both the locality 
and the mythic sachem probably received their name, which may be interpreted 
" place of offering " or " contributing," 

That " Pomperaug's " war-club in other days must have passed 
through severe experiences, is evidenced by the fact that in order 
to reduce a serious fracture in the handle of it an application of 
thirty-five or forty feet of fine copper wire once had to be made. 
But in the time to come its fortunes will be different; it is now 
likely to rest undisturbed in the quiet and seclusion of a collector's | 
cabinet, and afterward to serve as a nucleus of that collection of abo- 
riginal remains which is sometime to adorn the walls of the Bronson 
Library. When that collection is at length brought together, prop- 
erly classified, displayed and annotated, the people of Waterbury will 
have perpetually before them a picture of the life of their aboriginal 
predecessors of deep significance and of permanent value. 

* The donor adds : " Committed to the Rev. Joseph Anderson, D. D., with the request that when he ha? 
done with it said club shall go to the Bronson Library, of Waterbury, Conn." 



CHAPTER VI. 

early attempts to establish settlements in new england the 

london company the plymouth company the pilgrims 

London's plantation in Massachusetts bay — the ships of 

1629 transfer of the GOVERNMENT FROM ENGLAND TO NEW 

ENGLAND WATERBURY NAMES IN MASSACHUSETTS AND PLYMOUTH 

IN 1636 WAHGINNACUT VISITS ENGLISHMEN, TO INDUCE MIGRA- 
TION TO THE CONNECTICUT RIVER DUTCH AT HARTFORD JOHN 

OLDHAM, THE FIRST TRADER PLYMOUTH'S TRADING HOUSE AT 

WINDSOR NEWTOWN'S PETITION FOR REMOVAL — ^I ASSACHUSETTS' 

EFFORTS TO RETAIN THE SETTLERS WITHIN HER JURISDICTION 

THE "FORTY-TON BARK " THE COURT's GOOD-BY BLESSING 

ARRIVAL ON THE CONNECTICUT RIVER HARDSHIPS CONTENDED 

WITH DURING THE FIRST WINTER. 

IT IS difficult for the inhabitants of the Connecticut of to-day 
to become thoroughly conscious of the fact that no man, no 
record, no library in existence, can give the name of a person 
who lived in any portion of our State three hundred years ago. 
The attempt at making this truth our own produces a train of 
thought not altogether pleasing, and brings home in a way that 
is new the oft -repeated words: Our fathers tvcrc pilgrims and 
strangers. 

New England had been seen of John and Sebastian Cabot in 
1497, and, in 1498, they had sailed along the coast, and their passing- 
glance had secured for England, under the reign of King Henry 
VII, that possession by sight which England held for nearly three 
centuries. 

In 1602, Bartholomew Gosnold with thirty-two men, had landed 
on Cape Cod, lingered a month with the intention to settle, and 
then returned to England. 

In 1605, George Weymouth found Gosnold's Cape Cod, followed 
the coast northward, entered the Kennebec River, ascended it many 
miles, stole five Indians, and returned to England. 

In 1607, George Popham, under the direction of his kinsman, Sir 
John Popham, with one hundred and twenty colonists, entered the 
same river, landed at its mouth, and built a village Let us hope 
that the five Indians who had been stolen, were returned by this 
early and convenient opportunity. Success did not attend this enter- 



78 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



prise. George Popham, the leader, died, and the adventurer, wSir John 
Popham, died, and the weary and disappointed colonists returned 
to England. 

In 1606, not an Englishman was known to be in North America. 
In that year special interest was awakened in England in the un- 
occupied lands of the New World. Certain " Lords and Gentlemen " 
formed two companies, for the settlement of parts of America. 
Men of London and its vicinity called their combination, " The Lon- 
don Company." Men of Plymouth called their association, " The 
Plymouth Company." Both companies intended to cause colonies to 
be established in "Virginia," which name in 1606 served to indicate 
all that region lying between South Carolina on the south and the 
most northern part of the State of New York on the north. To 
the London Company was allotted South Virginia ; to the Plymouth 
Company, North Virginia. It was provided that neither company 
should plant within one hundred miles of any settlement already 
begun by the other. This provision serves to account for the lap- 
ping of the territory of one company upon that of the other, for 
South Virginia's northern limit was the south-western point of pres- 
ent Connecticut, while North Virginia's southern limit ran down 
into present Virginia. From these two companies of London and 
Plymouth and their successors, have emanated the many patents 
and grants that confront the investigator with a net-work of rights, 
dii^cult to follow through all the complications arising from uncer- 
tain bounds. 

Sir John Popham's adventure of 1607, already referred to, seems 
to be the first fruit of the attempt of the English Company of Ply- 
mouth to settle North Virginia or New England. 

For seven years we are without a record of any attempt at 
colonization. 

In 1614 Captain John Smith explored the shore from Cape Cod to 
Penobscot River, and gave to the country the name of New Eng- 
land. The following year, he is said to have set sail for the New 
World, prepared to plant a colony— to have been made a prisoner by 
a French fleet, and his colony not to have been planted. In the 
same year Adrian Block, the Dutch navigator, sailed through Long 
Island Sound, and it is said that he discovered the Connecticut 
river, and ascended it as far as present Hartford. 

If we look for the motives that prompted colonization down to 
this date we shall find them in the words, profit, proprietorship, and 
freedom in a new land to do, and, to be. 

But here we coiiie to the landing of the Pilgrims, and the 
strange storv of their grant of land along the Delaware River 



LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAT. 79 

from the London Company, but with no charter from the King, and 
their landing, no man may tell why, on bleak Plymouth shore with- 
out grant or charter, and their everlasting growth from that day to 
this — their motive, first and last, being "freedom to worship God," 
with all the profits and proprietorships possible added thereto. 

Mention should here be made of merchant Thomas Weston's 
seventy-five men, gathered in 1622 from the streets of London, and 
planted at Wessaguscus, now Weymouth, where they disagreed with 
the Indians, and, being unwholesome members of society, were 
aided, most willingly, by the men of Plymouth in their return to 
England ; of Thomas Morton and his followers, who came in the 
same year, and whose yet-to-be-told history we may not follow, from 
the time when Miles Standish paid him a visit and sent him across 
the sea, down to 1630, when he was again returned to England by the 
Massachusetts Bay Company, his goods confiscated to pay his debts 
and expenses and for " a canoe he unjustly took from the natives, 
and his house burned down to the ground in the sight of the 
Indians, for their satisfaction for many wrongs he had done them 
from time to time." The above is from the Records of Massachu- 
setts, while a modern historian tells us that the accusation against 
him "seems to have been based upon the fact that he used the Book 
of Common Prayer," but the Records give us no hint that he prayed 
at all. 

Soon after the Pilgrims were established, fishing vessels began 
to visit the coast. They were sent out by English merchants, and 
were, apparently, the heralds of the great Pviritan colonization 
scheme. A fishing village began to grow on Cape Ann, but it did 
not thrive. Troubles came upon it, which were softened by the 
ministrations of Mr. Roger Conant. Thus early we come upon a 
trail that leads directly to our Waterbury, for, in 177 1, Dr. Roger 
Conant, the grandson in the fifth generation of this Mr. Roger 
Conant, settler at Salem before 1628, came to Waterbury, where he 
married in 1774 Elizabeth, daughter of "Thomas Bronson, Esq.," and 
died during the war of the Revolution, on Long Island. Mr. Roger 
Conant, by appointment of the owners in England, became the 
leader of the settlement. The English capitalists soon grew weary 
of their unprofitable adventure and withdrew from it, leaving the 
little colony of fishermen and planters ashore, and adrift from 
help. Roger Conant stood by and dre^v them away from Cape Ann 
to Indian Nahumkeeke, often called Naumkeag, and now Salem. 
When the Puritans came to New England, these men from Cape 
Ann were already in possession, and are the o/d planters so often 
referred to, and to whom special rights adhered because of their 



8o HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

possessive priority — the beaver trade and the raising of tobacco 
being' of the number. 

There was another venture made that deserves mention, that of 
Captain Wollaston, who, about the year 1625, brought over a com- 
panv of "indented" white servants; but not finding a market for 
their labor he, it is said, after a tarry at Mount Wollaston, other- 
wise Morton's Merry Mount, and now Braintree, "carried them to 
Virginia and sold them [their labor] there." 

Thus it is found that the only band of immigrants that had held 
to the soil, despite every disadvantage, had been the Pilgrims of 
Plymouth, and they had lived largely on things invisible to Lords 
of Trade in England or elsewhere. This little band of one hundred 
and one in 1620, and forty-five in 162 1, had, in 1628, become three 
hundred, when the Puritan exodus began. "j\lr. John Endicott 
and some with him were sent to begin a plantation, in 1628, 
at Massachusetts Bay." These were followed, in 1629, b}^ three 
hundred men, eighty women, and twenty-six children, with one 
hundred and forty head of cattle and forty sheep, which set sail, in 
three ships, for London's Plantation in the Massachusetts Bay. It 
is difficult to resist the temptation to give items concerning the 
fitting out of these ships. No Arctic expedition of to-day could be 
more carefully and thoughtfully ecpiipped than were the George 
Bonaventure, the Talbot, and the Lion's Whelp, by the English 
Company of men (and one woman whose name is unknown), who 
ventured their money in the enterprise. There had been great 
content the year before when Mr. Endicott had given himself to the 
company, and when Rev. Mr. Higginson adventured himself in 
1629, great was the joy among the capitalists. It gave good heart to 
the work. Mr. Higginson came in the Talbot, Rev. Mr. Skelton in 
the George Bonaventure, bringing with him his library of fifty 
volumes. Rev. Mr. Bright, who had been trained up under Rev. 
John Davenport, came in the Lion's Whelp. It is interesting to 
note that Mr. Davenport and Mr. Theophilus Eaton were both 
adventurers in the Puritan settlement of the Bay, and that its first 
three ministers were approved by Mr. Davenport. 

Besides the three ministers, the ships bore almost everything, 
including the " English Bible in folio of the last print," the Book 
of Common Prayer, the Charter itself, in the care of Mr. Samuel 
Sharp, and the oath that was to be administered on the ship's 
arrival to Mr. Endicott, the elected Governor. In their cargoes 
were mill stones, and stones of peaches, plums, filberts and cherries ; 
"kernells" of pear, apple, quince and " pomegranats ;" seeds of 
liquorice, woad, hemp, flax and madder ; roots of potatoes and hops ; 



LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAY. 8i 

Utensils of pewter, brass, copper, and leather ; hogsheads of wheat, 
rye, barley, oats, beans, pease, and "bieffe;" thousands of bread; 
hundreds of cheese, and codfish ; gallons of olive oil, and Spanish 
wyne; tuns of water, and beer ; thousands of billets of wood, beside 
the loads of chalk, the thousands of brick, and " chauldrens of sea 
coales," that were cast in the "ballast of the shipps." 

To these, and other items, must be added the apparel of three 
hundred men, and the long list of the munitions of death with 
which each ship w^as freighted. There were ensigns— "partisans, 
for captain and lieutenant," halberts, for sergeants — muskets with 
fire locks, four foot in the barrel, without rests— long fowling 
pieces, six and a half feet long— full muskets, four feet in the barrel, 
wath " match-cocks " and rests— bandaleeres, each with a bullet bag — 
horn flasks, to hold a pound apiece — "cosletts," pikes and half 
pikes— barrels of powder and small shot— eight pieces of land 
ordnance, for the fort— whole culverings— demiculverings— sackers 
and iron drakes — great shot, and drums— with a sword, and a belt 
for every one of the three hundred men. 

After this manner was carried on the great Puritan exodus be- 
tween 1630 and 1640. Time and space have been given to the 
three ships named, because Waterbury is, in a certain way, linked 
to them in its history. Their passengers came under the conduct 
of a close corporation, fully entitled to govern and make its ow^n 
laws, subject only to the Crown of England. The Governor and 
Council of Massachusetts Bay, in Neiu England, came, governed most 
minutely by the General Court of the Governor and Company of the 
Massachusetts Bay, /;/ London— ^.n^i many of the laws, the severity 
of which has hung like a pall over the memory of Puritan and 
Pilgrim, will be found to have been imposed upon them by the 
power that lay behind the local government. A list of the passen- 
gers in the three ships, if it exists, will give to us, among others, 
the names of the men who came as planters, and paid their five 
pounds each for passage — the names of those who came under 
engagements to the company for special services— as vine dressers, 
makers of salt, hunters, shipwrights, iron-workers, and other arti- 
sans necessary to the achievement of a successful plantation. The 
Pilgrim, the Mayflower and the Power Sisters soon crossed the 
ocean, each undoubtedly bringing its one hundred and twenty-five 
passengers— the number permitted. These were soon followed by 
scores of ships, eight having arrived within a single week. 

To Governor Matthew Craddock, by far the largest adventurer 
in this colony-building, although he seems never to have visited 
America, belongs the honor of having suggested the removal of the 
6 



32 BISTORT OF WATEBBURT. 

government itself from England to New England. The transfer 
was made in 1630 in the ship Arbella, which arrived on June 12. It 
brought, as a passenger, John Winthrop, who had been elected in 
England as governor of the Company to succeed Governor Crad- 
dock, and who superseded Governor Endicott, who had governed 
the Massachusetts Bay Colony in this country but six months. 
There are no lists, known to the writer, of the passengers who 
came in the six ships here mentioned, by which the great emigra- 
tion was inaugurated. 

While it is apparent that the number of men who were made 
freemen in the colony was not more than one in five of the inhabi- 
tants subject to military duty, yet we find among the freemen in 
the first list, that containing the names of those who were admitted to 
the honor on the eighteenth of May, 1631, three family names, held 
by three of the first proprietors of Waterbury. They are Richard- 
son, Gaylord, and Jones. Richards, Welton, Porter, Andrews, and 
Gridley had been added to the list by 1634; Warner, Hopkins, 
Stanley, Newell, Scott, and Lanckton, before March of 1635, while 
Judd— and his name was Thomas— and Carrington appear before 
Tune of 1636 ; thus connecting more than one-half of the first settlers 
of Waterbury with the Puritans of the Bay. If we turn to the 
Plvmouth Colony, we shall find there also the names of Hopkins, 
Barnes, Andrews, Jones, Richards, and Stanley, while, in both 
colonies, we may find many other names that have made, and are 
making, worthy records in the history of our town, whose bearers 
were already residents in New England before the migration to 
Connecticut began. 

Going back to the statement that no man can give to us the 
name of an inhabitant of Connecticut three hundred years ago, we 
may add to it, that the most distant recorded echo of human 
footsteps on its soil comes down to us through only two hundred 
and sixty years. The footsteps are those of Wahginnacut, an Indian. 
The story of white men in the Massachusetts had come to him, and 
he perhaps thought, in his human, Indian heart, that white men 
would be good to have in Connecticut. Wahginnacut had a good 
and human reason for his thought. As nearly as the story can now 
be told, the Indians of Connecticut River had passed through a 
quarrel with the Pequot or Thames River Indians, the outcome of 
which had been that the Pequot tribe had seized the lands of 
Wahginnacut's tribe along the river ; and the hope that illumined 
his dusky mind was, that the presence of white men would restore 
to the native Indians the lost valley of their fathers. Inspired 
with this hope, Wahginnacut traveled in 1631 from the Connecticut 



LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAY. 83 

River to Massachusetts, and paid a visit to Governor Winthrop at 
the Bay, and to Governor Winslow at Plymouth, to induce migra- 
tion to his noble river. He offered, in his princely way, to furnish 
eighty beaver skins a year — and this was at a time when beaver 
was as good as gold, and we have Governor Craddock's word for 
it, that it should fetch in the English market pound for pound. 
It was a large salary that Wahginnacut offered to Englishmen for 
dwelling in his land, for he added to the beaver the promise to 
furnish corn for the white men; and 3'et, we have been tohi that the 
Indians were not husbandmen before their demoralization began 
— and this in face of the fact that captain, or passengers, or crew 
of the Mayflower, robbed the storehouses of corn, that the Indians 
of Cape Cod had laid up for the season of 162 1. 

For a time, the proffers of the Indian seem to have been made in 
vain, for neither company availed itself of his information, or 
accepted his offerings ; but two years later, in the^autumn of 1633, the 
seed that he had sown gave signs of growth. Plymouth Colony 
made a venture, and, so far as we know, it was made on the strength 
of Wahginnacut's representations. The frame of a trading-house 
had been made ready and placed on board a small vessel. Lieuten- 
ant William Holmes commanded the expedition, and an Indian, 
Nattawamut, a sachem, was its pilot. 

Already the Pequot Indians had made sale of lands on the Con- 
necticut River to the Dutch, lands that had been wrested from Nat- 
tawamut's tribe. The Dutch had taken possession of a point at 
Hartford, and when the Plymouth vessel sailed into and up the 
river, on its western bank a mound had been raised and two guns 
were pointing riverward. Lieutenant Holiues did not obey the 
signal from the fort or guns, but sailed on, unharmed, to the site of 
present Windsor. There, land was bought from the Connecticut 
River Indians, through Nattawamut. The trading-house was set up 
and garrisoned and the vessel went back to Plymouth, bearing 
what, for cargo, we know not, but we are told that the pilot, soon 
after his faithful service, died of small pox. 

It will be remembered that this trading-house was built in the 
autumn of 1633, under the auspices of Plymouth Colony. Massa- 
chusetts Bay had been invited to join in the venture, but declined, 
giving at the same time its consent to the work, in so far as it might 
have jurisdiction over the territory to be occupied. 

Through the regions usually characterized by writers as " pathless 
wilderness," it is well known there existed Indian thoroughfares, 
trails, and paths. The native Indian was, by nature and by practice, 
a traveler. He wandered, from very love of wandering — he roamed. 



84 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

as a hunter— lie visited his kindred tribes— he journeyed to sur- 
round council fires— he attended dances far and near— he failed not 
to be present at the annual games, held on natural plains like our 
own Manhan meadows, and he well knew how to mark a new path- 
way for the white man from plantation to plantation. Add to this 
the well known habit of the inland tribes of g-oing down to the sea to 
spend their summer days in fishing and digging clams, drying the 
clams in the sun and stringing them for winter store of food, 
and we shall not find it difficult to account for certain paths that 
existed, without apparent reason, at a very early date. The path, or 
trail, or road, as it is called, mentioned in 1674, from Milford to 
Farming-ton, is a case in point. This trail was probably made by 
the Indians of Tunxis wSepus, before Farmington came into being. 
The Indians of Farmington, without doubt, knew all about the fine 
fishing and clamming ground around Milford, long before English- 
men came. Milford was a favorite dwelling place ; Ansantawae 
had his "big wigwam" on Charles Island, we are told by Lambert, 
and the tribe gathered there. The very fact that in 1640 it was 
necessary for the first settlers of Milford to surround themselves 
with a palisado a mile square, is eloquent of the number of their 
Indian neighbors, while at Quinnipiac there was no need of a pali- 
sado, not above forty-seven warriors dwelling there. 

It was some such path, doubtless, through which, in the summer 
of 1633, the great Indian trader, John Oldham, "and three with 
him," came to Connecticut. The glimpses that we get, through the 
rifts in events, of Oldham, reveal a splendid, hopeful creature, 
through whose vision prosperity danced with a grace that in 1629 
kept three ships waiting in England for two months, while he set 
forth to the gentlemen who were the adventurers the gains of three 
for one that could be made, if certain trading powers were conferred 
upon him. Oldham deserves a monument ! He and the three 
unknown men with him were Connecticut's first traders. They 
had returned to the Bay by the fourth of vSeptember in that year, 
and it was in the same autumn that the vessel from Plymouth 
brought the trading-house into the river. 

Oldham reported that the sachem " used them kindly and gave 
them some beaver." He estimated the land distance to be about 
one hundred and sixty miles, and said that lie Iodised in Indiati towns 
all the zuay. He also "brought some black lead, whereof the Indians 
told him there was a whole rock." 

One can well imagine how this enthusiast, on his return, set the 
glories of Connecticut valley forth to the men who gathered to 
learn the story he had to tell. Three men (the name of but one is 



LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAY. 85 

given, as "Hall") were moved by it to set out in the cold of Novem- 
ber, to trade for themselves. Governor Winthrop records that they 
lost themselves, endured much misery, could not trade because the 
Indians were dying- of small-pox, and returned on the twentieth of 
January. To the imagination of John Oldham, brisk and fertile, 
and stirring with life and a very solid faith in itself, we may safely 
attribute the settlement of the valley, at so early a date. The 
trading venture of the men of Plymouth, and the overland journey 
of Oldham, seem to have been brought about by Wahginnacut's 
visit to the eastward. The other items that we have been able to 
glean concerning Connecticut in the year 1633, are the following: 
Oct. 2, "The bark Blessing, which had been sent to the southward, 
returned. She had been at an island over against Connecticut, 
called Long Island, because it is near fifty leagues long. There, 
they had store of the best wampumpeak, both white and blue. 
They have many canoes, so great as one will carr)^ eighty men. 
They were also in the river of Connecticut, which is barred at the 
entrance, so as they could not find above one fathom of water." 

On the twenty-first of January following, in the same year, news 
was received at Massachusetts that Captain Stone, putting in at the 
mouth of Connecticut, " on his way to Virginia, where the Pequin * 
inhabit, was there cut off: by them, with all his company, being 
eight." Within four months after the return of Hall, we find 
Newtown, now Cambridge, petitioning the court for liberty to 
remove the town to a more commodious site. On j\Iay 13, 1634, the 
inhabitants were granted leave to seek out some convenient place 
for themselves, with the promise that it should be confirmed to 
them for a habitation, provided that it did not take in any place to 
prejudice a plantation already settled. 

In this permit, no limit of jurisdiction was included, and, as early 
as July, "six men of Newtown went in the Blessing, to discover 
Connecticut River, intending to remove their town thither." We 
are left without any knowledge of the work accomplished by these 
six unknown men. It is probable that they had for a fellow passen- 
ger Governor Winslow of Plymouth, for he visited the Plymouth 
trading-house in his "bark," that summer. It is also possible and 
even probable that the tradition regarding the presence of English- 
men at Wethersfield in the winter of 1634, is based upon this visit 
and its results for a foundation ; if so, the men were not Watertown 
men who were there, but Newtown men, as is proven by the fact 
that it was not until May of 1635, that Watertown petitioned for 
leave to remove. It is well known that present Hartford was 

* The Pequots. 



86 HISTORY OF WATERS UR7. 

formerly Newtown; Windsor was Dorchester, and Wethersfield was 
Watertown, respectively named from the towns of the same names in 
the Bay, whence most of their first settlers came. 

In September 1634, the court convened, and its most important 
business was the serious discussion regarding the removal of 
Newtown to Connecticut. " The matter was debated divers days 
and many reasons alledged pro and con." Newtown men com- 
plained of the want of accommodation for their cattle, "so as they 
were not able to maintain their ministers." They had no room to 
receive more of their friends to help them. The towns were too near 
each other. Connecticut was fruitful and commodious, and Dutch 
or English would possess it soon. To these reasons was added, "the 
strong bent of their spirits," urging them to go. 

Massachusetts said that these men ought not to depart, because 
they were bound by oath to seek the welfare of the commonwealth, 
which was in danger, being weak, and the departure of Mr. Hooker 
would not only draw away many already in the Bay but would 
divert others from it. Beside, they who might go would be exposed to 
evident peril from the Dutch and Indians, "and also from our own 
State at home, who would not endure they should sit down, without 
a patent, in any place which our king lays claim unto." The 
outcome was, that both Boston and Watertown offered Newtown 
enlarged accommodations. The congregation of Newtown accepted, 
for the time, the offer of the towns, and the fear of their going 
forth was removed. 

The General Court had learned wisdom by the action of New- 
town, and, when in May of 1635 Watertown and Rocksbury, and in 
June, Dorchester sent up, asking permission to remove, the court 
granted all the requests, but limited the territory to some place 
within the jurisdiction of the Court. 

A careful reading of the records of Massachusetts Bay, from 1630 
to 1636, and of Connecticut colony from 1636 to any subsequent 
date, will reveal to the reader the wisdom of the migration to 
Connecticut. 

The men who came to Wethersfield, Hartford, and AVindsor, 
were not the men who could have " sat down in peace " under the 
jurisdiction of the Bay. It is well known that one man of their 
number, Thomas Hooker, could dispense "the shines of his favour" 
upon colony or continent — for, to the light of one sermon of his we 
owe the Constitution of our State and of our United States. 

We take but a step within the Records of Massachusetts in the 
year 1635, before we find the wisdom of the serpent well delineated 
in the Court's organized opposition to Connecticut's first attempts at 



LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAY. 87 

settlement. It squirms in the very laws enacted in that year, and 
repealed when there was no longer use for them. Certain of the 
men who wished to leave had taken the Freeman's Oath. In the 
beginning- of 1635, it was ordered that every man, sixteen years or 
older, who had been six months in the jurisdiction, servants 
included, should take the oath of a Resident, with punishment at 
the discretion of the court, upon refusal — thus placing bonds upon 
themselves to remain within the jurisdiction of the Bay. If any 
resident should presume to leave without due permission, special 
laws were made for his speedy return by every means that could be 
pressed into service, on land or sea. The way was still farther 
hedged by an enactment that forbade any man to carry out of the 
jurisdiction a bushel of corn without the consent of the governor, or 
an assistant, under penalty of eight shillings, when corn was selling 
for five shillings. Another law was made, forbidding resident or 
stranger to buy any commodity whatever from any ship, under 
penalty of confiscation, without like permission. Meanwhile, the 
elders and brethren of every church were entreated " to devise one 
uniform order of discipline in the churches agreeable to the vScrip- 
tures, and to consider how far the magistrates were bound to inter- 
pose for the preservation of uniformity." This was, perhaps, the 
first open appeal from Court to Church. The battle was between 
the adherents of a " Covenant of Works," and a " Covenant of Grace," 
and we learn incidentally that Mr. Hooker was believed, by one 
man at least, ;!o^ to preach a " Covenant of Works." 

It is well known that the corner stone of Church and State in 
the Bay was laid in mortar mixed only by church members, but a 
new enactment went forth at this time. It is not clear that it was 
aimed at the churches and congregations that removed to Connecti- 
cut, but there is nothing to evidence that such was not the case. 
It forbade a man the rights of citizenship, even though a church 
member, unless the particular church of which he was a member 
/lad been gatJiered with the consent of the neighboring churches and elders. 

The times were stirring with events. The first military organ- 
ization of the colony of twelve towns took place. 

But the crowning disturber of the period was Mrs. William 
Hutchinson, who came to Massachusetts about 1634, w4th her hus- 
band and son Edward. With her individuality, her able gifts, and 
her undoubted charm of manner, she wrought what was believed 
by the Puritans of the Puritans to be great mischief, by her daring 
flights of liberty of belief and thought. It is hard to understand 
why the court allotted her to be kept prisoner by one of her alleged 
captives, John Cotton, but the Puritans were a mysterious people, 



88 HISTORY OF WATERBUBT. 

and we need an interpreter. It finally became necessary in the eyes 
of the Court to deprive a considerable number of the staid inhabitants, 
notably fifty-nine men of Boston, of all fire-arms or other means of 
offense and defense. The very permits to the towns for removal, 
that have been cited, were accompanied by an edict, under which 
a committee was appointed to imprison persons suspected to be 
enemies to the Commonwealth and to bring in, " alive or dead, such 
as should refuse to come under command or restraint." Did this mean 
such as should attempt to escape from jurisdiction into Connecticut ? 

This edict had been issued but a few days, when an arrival from 
England wrought a magical change in the hard heart of the Massa- 
chusetts Court. The arrival was only a little forty-ton bark, with 
twenty men in it, who were called servants. The bark and the men 
had been sent over by Sir Richard Saltonstall. The magic of the 
affair was, that they were "to go plant at Connecticut." The Court 
serpent at once became a courting-dove — and brooded her departing 
children with " three pieces to fortifie themselves withall." Two small 
pieces of artillery were also lent to them for the same purpose, and 
six barrels of powder granted ; two out of Watertown ; two out of 
Dorchester, and two out of Rocksbury. To these were added two 
hundred shot, all of which Captain Underbill and Mr. Beecher 
(also a captain) were to deliver — and the Connecticut towns were 
granted liberty to choose their own constable. 

There was evident haste to take possession of the new territory 
before Sir Richard Saltonstall's men should begin their settlement, 
and the colonists, anxious to depart for Connecticut, went forth 
with the good -by blessing of the Court. It will be noticed that 
there was no requisition of powder from Newtown. This may have 
been because six men of that place (now Cambridge) were already 
upon the Connecticut River, for we know that they were there as 
early as July of 1634. Governor Winthrop tells us that the men of 
Dorchester were set down near the Plymouth trading -house (at 
Windsor), in August, 1635, at which date they had been there long 
enough to cause the Dutch to send home into Holland for com- 
mission to deal with the English at Connecticut. 

That the inhabitants were at AVethersfield early, may be inferred 
from the fact that permission w^as given to Watertown to migrate 
early in May, and dismission granted by the church of the same 
place to members to form anew in a church covenant in Connecticut 
on the 29th of the same month. We find also that if the inhabi- 
tants were not removed from Watertown in Massachusetts to 
Watertown on the River, by the last of October, 1636, their inter- 
est in the lands to be divided was to be forfeited. 



LONDON'S PLANTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAY. 89 

Bv the 6th of October, we learn from the journal of Governor 
Winthrop, that the three towns were gone to Connecticut. On the 
day that Winthrop recorded that fact he tells us that there arrived 
two great ships, the Defence and the Abigail. John Winthrop, Jr., 
who had been in England for a number of months, and Sir Henry 
Vane were passengers on the ships. The fame of Connecticut had 
been carried across the sea. Men of station and fortune in England 
had secured a patent and charter and resolved to establish a new 
colony along the banks of the beautiful river. John Winthrop seems 
to have gone abroad on this very mission, for he returned with 
authority " from Lord vSay, Lord Brook, and divers other great per- 
sons in England, to begin a plantation, and to be its governor." Men 
and ammunition and two thousand pounds in money he had, to 
begin a fortification at the mouth of the river. Massachusetts Bay 
took the part of her colony children when Sir Henry Vane treated 
with the magistrates concerning the three towns, gone thither. Sir 
Henry Vane thought that the towns should give place to the new 
commission, and Massachusetts seems to have demanded full satis- 
faction, in case they were required to do so. 

It was November before the new " Governor Winthrop, Jr.," by 
the appointment of the " Lords of Connecticut," sent a bark and 
about twenty men to take possession, and to begin building. This 
little expedition was only just off for its work, when there came 
in " a small Norsey bark, with one Gardiner, an expert engineer or 
work-base, and provisions of all sorts, to begin a fort at vSaybrook." 

Nature frowned mightily upon little Connecticut in her first 
efforts at life. Her Indian children had been so reduced in num- 
bers by small -pox in 1634, that the winter of 1635 found scanty store 
of corn or other provisions awaiting the emergency that came upon 
the white settlers when their own provision ships failed to arrive. 

The overland route was probably taken in the simimer or av;tumn 
of 1635. The goods and provisions of the little company went by 
sea in two shallops, or barks. An east wind arose in the night. 
The boats were cast away upon " Browns Island near the Gurnetts 
Nose," and every man was drowned. Meanwhile, the people were 
waiting, not knowing why the lost barks failed them. Winter came 
before its time. Snow fell, when it was only time for leaves to fall. 
Early in November it was knee-dftep. Before the ninth of the 
month six men had wandered for ten days in the cold and the snow 
in their efforts to reach Plymouth, having been cast away in " Man- 
amett " Bay, on their return from Connecticut. The fifteenth of 
November the river was closed by ice, thus cutting off, most com- 
pletely, all hope of their provisions reaching them by sea. The day 



90 HISTORY OF WATERS URF. 

after the river was frozen, twelve men set out for Massachusetts, 
to secure help. 

Of this journey, we have the following record : "November 26, 
1635, there came twelve men from Connecticut. They had been ten 
days upon their journey and had lost one of their company drowned 
in the ice by the way, and had been all starved, but that by God's 
providence they lighted upon an Indian wigwam." 

In their extremity, and having, it would seem, full faith that 
their lost barks would come to the river's mouth, about seventy 
men and women determined to brave the perils of a journey to 
meet them. Perhaps they also had some hope of relief from the 
provisions that were sent by the thirty - ton bark for the twenty 
men, at the fort, in the beginning of November. 

They did not meet the expected help, but they found the ship 
Rebecca of sixty tons. It is not quite clear whether the company 
went on board the Rebecca twenty miles up the river or at the 
river's mouth. Winthrop tells us that two days before, the ship 
had been frozen in twenty miles above the sound, and that it ran 
upon a bar in getting to sea and was forced to unload before it 
could get off. He also adds that the Rebecca was set free from the 
ice by a small rain. Historians tell us that these starving people 
cut it out. They arrived in Massachusetts December 10, having 
been but five days at sea, "which was a great mercy of God, for 
otherwise they had all perished with famine, as some did." 

A little later, Winthrop tells us that those of Dorchester who had 
removed their cattle to Connecticut before winter, lost the greater 
part of them, "but some, which arrived at the eastern bank too late 
to be taken over, lived all the winter without any hay ; that the 
people were put to great straits for want of provisions. They ate 
acorns and malt and grains." 

The hardships and suffering of that 1635 winter, have never been 
told — can never be known. The heroism of it has slipped noise- 
lessly down into unbroken silence. The names even of the men and 
the women who stayed to eat acorns and malt, or who wandered 
in snow and cold, without food, to the river's inouth ; or of those 
who braved the journey overland, or who perished by the way, are 
utterly unknown. But this we do know — that of the men and 
women who had part in the events outlined in this migration, were 
the fathers and mothers or the grandfathers and grandmothers of 
men and women who, two hundred and fourteen years ago, made 
their homes in the leafy basin that holds within its hill-notched 
rim the Waterbury of to-day. 



CHAPTER VII. 

MASSACHUSETTS BAY COLONY GOVERNS CONNECTICUT JOHN OLDHAM 

AND THE PEQUOT WAR CONNECTICUT COLONY A MILITARY 

ORGANIZATION GOVERNMENT BY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE THE 

FIRST GOVERNOR BEGINNINGS OF TOWNS FARMINGTON PLANTA- 
TION GROWTH OF LAWS TROUBLES FROM AND WITH INDIANS 

FREEMEN ADMITTED LAND BOUGHT AT DERBY — CONNECTICUT 

OBTAINS A CHARTER FROM KING CHARLES II NEW HAVEN COL- 
ONY UNITES WITH CONNECTICUT — FORMATION OF COUNTIES — 
COUNTY COURTS. 

THE first civil ofBcer in Connecticut was William Westwood. 
He was appointed by Massachusetts Bay constable of the 
plantations on Connecticut River in vSeptember, 1635, and 
seems to have been the sole representative of Law and Order 
during- the first six months of the existence of the Colony. "John 
Winthrop, Jr., Governor " — as the son was called by the father, 
Governor John Winthrop of Massachusetts Bay— had apparently 
no desire to exercise authority over the colonists at Connecti- 
cut, althoug-h he had been commissioned to do so by the " Lords 
of Connecticut " in England. Winthrop was on the ground in 
the beginning- of the year 1636, and remained for several 
months either up the river with the new towns, or at the fort 
at the mouth of the river. The General Court of the Bay,. 
therefore, arose to the emergency of the hour in March, 1636, and 
created a provisional government, placing it in the hands of 
eight persons selected out of the number of their "loving friends, 
neighbors, freemen, and members, gone, and to go, unto the 
river." William Westwood was one of the eight. He had been 
appointed to the office of constable in 1635, and this appointment 
gives his name to us as a resident of Connecticut during the wanter 
of that year. It was on the last day of May that Mr. Hooker and 
the rest of his congregation set off for Connecticut. We all know 
that this company went by land, and that Mrs. Hooker was carried 
in a horse-litter; that the company drove one hundred and sixty 
cattle, and fed of their milk by the way. It may not be as generally 
known that this company, when leaving Massachusetts, turned their 
backs upon fifteen great ships riding at anchor in the bay, so brisk 
was the business of emigration as then carried on, and that the 
echoes had scarcely died away from the volley of great shot fired by 



92 



HISTORY OF WATERS UBY. 



the fleet on the election of Sir Henry Vane as governor. The first 
court was held at Hartford— then Newtown — in 1636. " Newtowne " 
in Massachusetts became Cambridge in 1638; Newtown in Connec- 
ticut became "Hartford Towne" in 1636. Five of the eight mem- 
bers of the government were present. Henry vStiles was the first 
legal culprit in the colony. He traded a " peece " for corn with the 
Indians. He was ordered to regain it in a fair and legal way. The 
first act of legislation was an order forbidding to trade fire-arms, 
powder or shot with the natives. To this law the people had been 
obedient in Massachusetts. That the first months of civilized living 
in the river-valley were not months of the apprehension of evil 
from the Indian is evident; for it was not until after the seventh of 
June, 1636, that a watch was established, and even then it was to 
begin and end only when ordered by authority. 

Peace and prosperity reigned until July, when John Oldham 
came upon the scene in a most tragic manner. He had been out a 
long time on one of his trading expeditions; had visited the Pequot 
region and passed on to Block Island. John Oldham's personal 
properties and his real estate were widely scattered; his interests 
were many. He seems to have acted as agent for Governor Crad- 
dock in England, and for others. "One John Gallop, with one 
more and two little boys," passing through Long Island Sound, saw 
and recognized his pinnace about two miles from Block Island, in 
the hands of fourteen Indians. Gallop at once made war upon boat 
and Indian crew. After the onslaught was over, certain of the sav- 
ages having leaped into the sea, three Indians were left alive. Two 
of them were prisoned in the hold of Oldham's boat. One, having 
surrendered to Gallop, was bound and placed in his boat. Another 
surrenderor had been bound and dropped overboard. Oldham's 
body, still warm, was found under a seine. After committing it to 
the sea. Gallop sailed away with the pinnace in tow, but, in the 
night, the wind rising, it was cast adrift, with the Indians in its 
hold. Later, Gallop's prisoner imi^licated the Narragansetts in the 
murder of Oldham. 

Up to this time, it is believed that but one attack had been made 
by Indians upon white men within the limits of Connecticut. A 
Captain Stone, then of Virginia, but from indications the same Cap- 
tain Stone who had been forbidden under penalty of death to re- 
enter Massachusetts jurisdiction, and who was accounted a worth- 
less person, had, three years earlier, been slain, with his com- 
pany of eight persons. In 1634, certain of the Pequots desiring 
a treaty with Massachusetts Bay, declared that the sachem who 
had been guilty of this crime had been killed by the Dutch, and 



MASSACHUSETTS BA T 'S PL ANT A TION IN CONNECTICUT. 95 

that all but two of the Indians engaged in the murder had died of 
small-pox, and that Stone himself had provoked the deed by seizing 
two Indians, whom he bound and conveyed to his boat, compelling 
them to pilot it up the river. It was now the summer of 1636, and 
" The Bay " had made no effort to punish the crime or seek redress 
for the murder of this captain of Virginia, or for his crew. 

The news of the killing of John Oldham aroused the people of 
Massachusetts to a spirit of indignation, the vindictiveness of which 
causes us, for the time, to regret our English blood. They made 
haste to gather their warriors. In less than five weeks, ninety men 
under four commanders, and generaled by Endicott himself, set forth 
for war. Their commission bade them ''put to death the men of 
Block Island, make of the women and children prisoners; and thence 
to go to the Pequots on the river Thames and demand the murderers 
of Captain Stone. If they refused, to demand as hostages Indian 
children. If denied, to take the hostages by force." As we have 
seen, two years had passed by; negotiations had more than once 
been carried on between "The Bay" and the Pequots, but no 
attempt had been made to secure the two Indian murderers who 
were left alive, showing that Stone's death was not a bereavement 
to the colony; but Oldham, wnth whom they had often differed, had 
a strong hold on their regard, and they desired to avenge his death. 

Block Island, as we see it to-day, does not seem an easy place for 
the men of two Indian towns to hide in, but hide they did in the 
brush-wood of oak that was so dense that men could only walk in 
file, so effectively, that ninety Englishmen could not find them in a 
two-days' search. When making a landing, about forty Indians had 
"entertained " them with their arrows, but these had immediately 
disappeared in the undergrowth. The Englishmen departed after 
having utterly destroyed two plantations, three miles apart, of sixty 
wigwams, " some of which were very large and fair," and two hun- 
dred acres of corn and seven canoes. How many Indians they killed 
by firing into the thickets they knew not, but Winthrop tells us that 
not a hair fell from the head of any one of the ninety men, " nor 
any sick or feeble person among them," — the light scratch of an 
arrow upon the neck of one man and the foot of another not being 
apparently worth the mention. Going thence to the Connecticut 
shore the ninety men were joined by twenty more. These were 
doubtless Captain Underhill's twenty men who had been lent to the 
Saybrook fort by "The Bsij," and we learn, incidentally, that they 
remained there three months. Augmented by this force the boats, 
four in number, set sail for the Thames river. There they pro- 
ceeded to do all the harm in their power to the Pequots. They 



^^ HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

burned wigwams on the left bank of the river and on the right, 
destroyed corn, killed, it is said, fourteen Indians, wounded forty, 
and departed entirely unharmed. Alas ! The blood-thirsty savage ! 
But he learned, if slowly, the lesson of avengement from the her- 
alds of the Gospel of Peace. Six months later "a general fast-was 
kept in all the churches in ' The Bay ' because, among other causes, 
of the dangers of those at Connecticut and of ourselves also by 
the Indians." ■ Oh, the deep satire of that fast ! (that is, as seen 
from our point of view). No wonder is it that "those of Connecti- 
cut showed themselves unsatisfied with this expedition against the 
Indians, finding themselves in danger," and compelled to join in 
the war of extermination which soon followed. 

No wonder is it that the Pequots found their way up the river in 
May, of 1637, as far as Wethersfield and avenged their losses by kill- 
ing and making captives. They killed six men, three women, and 
carried captive two young girls. This was the news by which Mr. 
Haynes, the first elected governor of the colony, was met at Say- 
brook about the fifth of May, 1637, when on his way with his family 
to join his fortunes with the men up the river. He wrote to Gover- 
nor Winthrop from Saybrook, announcing this first trouble with 
the Indians. History has it, but the authority is unknown to the 
writer, that the people of Wethersfield in buying their land from a 
friendly Indian, had promised that he might remain within the 
town limits, but expelled him, and that this violation of the treaty, 
as it were, with the Indian, caused him to bring the Peciuots upon 
the settlement. We hope, for the good name of our fathers, that 
this is not true; but subsequent events create a strong probability 
that the statement was founded on fact. One of the pleasantest 
things that we have to record is that the two English maids were 
rettirned unharmed to their homes before May ended by the order 
of the Dutch Governor, who sent a sloop demanding them. When 
refused, he threatened to break his treaty with the Indians, and 
seized hostages with which he ransomed the captives. 

The work of the Pequots at Wethersfield was accomplished 
before the first of May, for on that day the ninth session of court 
was held at Hartford. Six of the original members of it were pres- 
ent, and nine men called " comitties " appear in connection with its 
ofificers. Offensive war was declared against the " Pequoitt." Ninety 
men were levied out of the three plantations. Stricken Wethers- 
field furnished but eighteen of the number. The preparatory steps 
of this first war in our state are so simple that we may be forgiven 
for giving them. It must be kept in mind that every Englishman 
known to be within the limits of our state was confined to the three 



MASSACHUSETTS BAY'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT. 



95 



gatherings of humanity up the river, and the men, possibly forty, 
who were in and about the fort at the river's mouth. 

With the ninety men went twenty "Armour" and i8o bushels of 
corn. Of this corn, each plantation was to bake into biscuit one- 
half of its proportion if by any means it could do so; the other half 
was to be in ground meal. "For the captain and the sick men," 
there was to be a hogshead of good "beare," three or four gallons 
of strong water and two gallons of " sacke." The suet, butter, oat- 
meal, pease, salt and five hundred of fish, Hartford furnished. 
Windsor provided the pork, rice and cheese; while unfortunate 
Wethersfield had to give but a single bushel of " Indian Beanes." 
Every soldier carried one pound of powder, four of shot, and 
twenty "bulletts." From the river's mouth was to be taken a barrel 
of powder and a light gun, if it could be carried. 

Thus equipped, the soldiers of Connecticut Colony set forth to 
perform deeds forced upon them by the cruel onslaught of Endicott 
upon the Indians. Thus equipped, they sailed past the fort orna- 
mented by the heads of seven slain Pequots. No man worthy of 
the name can read of this onslaught without horror of spirit, or 
think of it without whole-souled pity and poignant regret. Alas, 
for the poor Pequot ! Treacherous he may have been, but no war- 
rior was he ! He could die in hundreds and he did, while but a 
single Englishman gave up his life in the slaughter. War it could 
not be called. The attitude of the two races was permanently 
changed by it Faith in the white man departed for ever from the 
Indian. Englishmen looked with guilty suspicion upon the Red 
man to the end. Confidence expired in blood and flame. Peace 
was gone from the land. Henceforth, life became a series of efforts 
to protect itself. It does not in any degree relieve the repulsiveness 
of the situation to take in the broad view of the natural selection 
of the races. In their turn, the Indians were avenged. A century 
of care and perplexity, accompanied by wakeful nights and anxious 
days, often emphasized by present terror and cruel death, was borne 
by the guilty and by the innocent. To-day, interest is beginning to 
develop itself in regard to this Indian, whom, every year, we have 
been driving into thickets of wrongs, until he has degenerated into 
what he is. And what is he ? 

In the Soldiers' Field, at Hartford, we find as land owners three 
W^aterbury names: John Warner, John Bronson and Thomas Barnes, 
the father of Benjamin of Mattatuck, who, we have reason to think, 
were soldiers in this Pequot war. On the second of June, 1637, 
thirty men were sent out of the three plantations into the Pequot 
country, to maintain the right that " God, by conquest," had given 



g6 HISTORY OF WATERBUBT. 

them. Crops had suffered from want of attention, during the weeks 
of war, and the following February, Indian corn was not to be had,, 
except from the Indians, who were treated very unfairly even in 
this thing. John Oldham's estate was the first settled in Con- 
necticut, and the court had much pains and trouble regarding it. 

Connecticut, by virtue of her conc^uest, began at once to collect 
tribute from the Indians, and in three years' time, the magis- 
trates at Hartford were sending all the way to Uncoway, our Fair- 
field, to collect it. It is well known that the pursuit of the Pequots 
to their final refuge gave to Englishmen their knowledge of the 
sea-coast lying to the westward towards the Dutch, and opened 
the way for the settlements at New Haven and Milford, which had 
their beginnings in the next year, and that the result of the war 
made of Connecticut colony a military organization, almost to a 
unit. Every man above sixteen years old was to bear arms, except 
he was excused by the court, or unless he was a church officer or 
an officer of the General or other Courts. There was a magazine of 
powder and shot in every plantation, fifty corslets were provided 
"and kept in the meeting-house,"* at Hartford, and every military 
man was continually to have in his house " half a pound of good 
powder, two pounds of bullets and a pound of match." Captain John 
Mason was the public military officer of the plantations. He was to 
train the men in each town ten days in the year; but not in June or 
July — Mason to give a week's warning. Watch by night and ward 
by day began. And thus was the century of care and tribulation 
inaugurated by our fathers in the towns on the river. 

Connecticut's treatment of the Indians after the subjugation and 
well-nigh extermination of the Pequot tribe, is a study at once 
curious and most interesting. She held out her mailed hand for 
tribute; extended a legal protectorate over a right or two that the 
Red man might possibly be thought to own by virtue of his crea- 
tion; admitted in many ways, with apparent unconsciousness, the 
wrongs she committed against him (as that in the Wethersfield 
trouble " the first breach was on the part of the English) ; " held him 
off, and lured him on, and knew no more what to do with him then 
than we do now. She tried quite earnestly to convert him; at the 
same time holding him responsible for crimes that he never commit- 
ted, and possibly knew nothing about. The Indians rebelled against 
imputed sin and other wrongs to such a degree that a whole century 
passed away before a chief of the Indian natives sought admission 
to a Christian church. When he came, his name was Ben Uncas, a 

* This gives the date of the first meeting-house at Hartford, as 1637. • 



3fA SSA CHU8ETTS BAY'S PL A NT A TION IN CONNECTIC UT. g 7 

sachem of the Mohegans. Being willing to encourage so good " a 
beginning, the Assembly desired the Governor to procure for him a 
coate made in the English fashion, and a hat, and for his wife a 
gown." The desire was granted. 

In the end of the year 1637, in March, Agawam (Springfield) 
sent deputies to the court. 

On the 14th of January, 1638, Mr. Hooker's sermon bore fruit in 
the constitution of Connecticut colony. A governor was about to be 
made, and his oath of office, as well as that of future magistrates 
and constables, was made ready. The governor promised in his 
oath "to execute justice according to the rule of God's word; " the 
magistrate, "according to the righteous rule of God's word," and 
the constable, " to execute all lawful commands or warrants from 
any magistrate or court." 

"John Haynes, Esq.," was chosen governor May 11, 1639. The 
deputy governors, the magistrates, the secretary and the treasurer 
were all chosen at the same meeting of the freemen, and the wheels 
of government immediately began to revolve, according to the will 
of the people. We can readily imagine that the occasion was one of 
great rejoicing on its first occurrence, and the election sermon and 
election cake commemorated it annually far into the present cen- 
tury. Thus early, a correspondence began with the neighbors at 
Quinnipiac. No person was punished for any crime or misdemeanor 
during three years from 1636 to 1639, and few complaints were 
made. That mild-mannered gentleman, Mr. Pinch eon, was " ques- 
tioned about imprisoning an Indian at Agawam, whipping an 
Indian and freeing of him," and a few fines were laid, but Justice 
held her hands off. In August, a treaty of combination with " The 
Bay" was thought of, but it was deferred after consultation with 
Mr. Fenwick, who had arrived at the fort, on account of the matter 
of bounds. 

It is impossible to write a page of the history of this period and 
leave out the Indian question. It suddenly comes to the front at 
this time in one of the incomprehensible ways practiced by our 
fathers. vSoheage, sometimes called Sequin, was a sachem of Weth- 
ersfield. Divers injuries had been done to him b}^ the English. He, 
in turn, committed wrongs against them, but between them all for- 
mer wrongs had been remitted the year before. He had been com- 
pelled to move down to Middletown. It does not appear that any 
new offense had been committed, but the Indians were accused of 
growing insolent, and the court was " put in mind that it had long 
neglected the execution of justice upon the former murtherers of 
the English." Surely, Oldham had been avenged, and the Wethers- 
7 



98 



HISTORY OF WATERBUBT. 



field victims, if they fell by the hands of the Pequots, had been 
most vengefully avenged; but now, in mid-August of 1639, two 
years after the Pequot war, one hundred men were levied to be sent 
down to Middletown, to demand the guilty persons of vSoheage, who 
was accused of harboring them. They desisted from their demands 
only by the persuasion of the New Haven people, who appealed for 
their own safety, and perhaps more potently because of the harm 
that might come to Connecticut colony and New Haven alike, by 
"the noise of a new war, that might hinder the coming of ships the 
next year." Of all things, the colonists dreaded anything inimical 
to immigration. 

The war-spirit contented itself for the time, by sending forty 
men in two shallops, with two canoes, to gather the corn that the 
Indian husbandmen had planted on land that had been conquered 
by the English to the eastward. It was said that the planting had 
been done contrary to agreement. This corn-robbing expedition 
was undoubtedly carried out, for, on the third of October, "the 
soldiers for the last exploit " were ordered paid for nine days, at two 
shillings per day. Meanwhile, the first Thanksgiving on record in 
Connecticut had been held on the iSth of September, 1639. 

Before October, 1639, vStratford, under the name of Pequanocke,* 
had the beginnings of a plantation, the formula for which we do 
not find, and Roger Ludlow, the former commandant of Castle 
Island, in Boston harbor, had taken upon himself to set Uncoway, 
or Fairfield, going into the ways of a well-ordered plantation. Gov- 
ernor Haynes and Mr. Wells made a visit at this time to Stratford, 
to see how matters were going there; to make freemen and admin- 
ister the oath of fidelity to the planters, and to assign Sergeant 
Nicholls, the ancestor of the Nichols family of Waterbury, to train 
the men and exercise them in military discipline; and then to visit 
Fairfield, in order to condemn or confirm the proceedings of Roger 
Ludlow there. This year, 1639, was an important year. Towns 
were insured certain rights in their own lands, and powers were 
bestowed for choosing officers and making orders for well-ordering 
the same. In fact, the town meeting was fully ordained, with its 
town book and town clerk, and the Probate Court was established at 
Hartford. There was one act of this October court, the result of 
which, if it did result in action, historians would delight to find. 
Six men of the three towns were appointed to gather up the 
passages of God's providence that had been remarkable since the 
first undertaking of the plantations, in each town, and then, jointly, 
to feather them up and deliver them unto the court, and if they 



■ It was also called Cupheage. 



MASSACHUSETTS BA T 'S PL ANT A TION IN CONNECTICUT 99 

were judged then fit, they were to be recorded. Will this record be 
found ? 

Thus early, the spirit of unrest had come upon the plantations. 
Men of Wethersfield had flitted and were about to flit to Milford 
and to Fairfield, and now, just as the year was ending, in January, 
1639, a committee was appointed, at the request of the planters of 
all these towns, to view the lands by Unxus wSepus (at Farmington) 
with all haste, that a new plantation might there be made. So 
urgent did this seem, even in the wintry Aveather, that the court 
was adjourned while the country should be viewed. The weather 
proved too severe, and AVethersfield, which seemed the most impor- 
tunate in the matter, agreed to wait until the next meeting of the 
General Court. Undoubtedly, the departure of persons from the 
last mentioned town to Milford and Fairfield was greatly deplored, 
and every means was used to keep her inhabitants near by. It has 
not been an easy matter to obtain light on the beginnings of indi- 
vidual towns; the lands of the original three plantations were 
ample, and could be extended by a word from the court. The 
children of the planters were not grown, in three years, to man's 
estate. A new generation had not come upon the stage to find all 
the places of public trust filled, and to desire to make new offices in 
a new place; therefore, this longing to emerge from town bounds 
could not have been born of the want of land. These early men 
were only just out of the toils of English life and law, and to every 
one of them who was endowed by nature with a spark of individu- 
ality, we can safely attribute an overwhelming desire to wield the 
power within him, without let or hindrance. wStich was the stability 
of English life then, as now, that men had no expectation of rising 
above the station into which they were born; therefore, in the new 
condition of things, what was more natural than that every man 
should seek to be born into a new town, whose good places were not 
already seized upon ? The conditions for the planting of Farming- 
ton were to be made in July of 1640, but the particular court of that 
date omits to give us the details, and because of this omission, we 
are obliged to grope in ignorance, gathering here and there the con- 
ditions attending the formation of plantations. 

In April of 1640, "Mr. Hopkins, Esqr.," was made governor, fif- 
teen men were made freemen, the bounds between Stratford and 
Fairfield were ordered, and the late governor, Mr. Haynes, had to 
make the journey to determine them. The first prison in the colony 
was prepared for, at Hartford. It was to be of stone, or wood, 
twenty-four feet long and sixteen or eighteen feet broad, with a cellar. 
Our Thomas Hancox presided over the Hartford prison after he left 



loo HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Waterbury in 1691. Intended marriage engagements were to be 
published in some public place and at some public meeting at least 
eight days before the parties became engaged, and the same interval 
was required between the engagement and the celebration of the 
marriage covenant. Hartford had one hundred and fourteen land 
owners, and the court was, as usual, very busy making laws to pre- 
vent the Indians from becoming bold and insolent. Any Indian 
who had the curiosity to touch any weapon of any sort in house or 
field, was to pay half a fathom of wampum and to pay "life for life, 
lymbe for lymbe, wound for wound " in case of accident to life or 
limb thereby. Moreover, the culprit was to pay for the healing of 
such wounds; if he stole he was to pay double and receive such pun- 
ishment as the " magestrats " chose to inflict. He might not enter the 
house of an Englishman; and he might not enter the plantations, 
except on conditions. The first will appeared on record — that of 
Henry Pack [?], wherein he bestowed upon the church the clock that 
his brother Thornton had bought. The first prisoner was kept by 
John Porter, constable of Windsor, with lock and chain, and held to 
hard labor and coarse diet; the Oath of Fidelity for the western 
plantations at Stratford and Fairfield was made ready; the Hartford 
portion of the first highway in the colony — that from Hartford to 
Windsor — was mended suflficiently " for man to ride and go on foot 
and make drift of cattle comfortably," and to the governor was 
given liberty of free-trade up the river for seven years. 

In this year, 1640, the colonists took a long look ahead. They 
recognized the vital necessity of securing to themselves some com- 
modity to defray the charges conseciucnt upon supplying their 
needs from abroad. The raising of English grain seemed to the 
government to promise well for that end, and it at once gave per- 
mission to all persons within its plantations to seek out suitable 
ground where it might soonest be raised, and granted to each 
"teeme" furnished a hundred acres of ploughing ground and 
twenty of meadow. The main condition to be regarded was, that 
twenty acres, that is, the meadow, was to be improved the first year, 
and the one hundred within three years. Careful and minute 
orders concerning the same were to be carried out by a committee, 
of whom the " Worshipful! " Edward Hopkins was one. Men were 
to send in their names and be served by the town, after the commit- 
tee had made choice for themselves. A comjDetent lot was to be 
allowed for each owner of a team, for a workman to manage the 
business and carry on the work. Stock removed to such place was 
to be levied to the town from whence it came. The committee 
might even admit inhabitants plantation-wise. In fact, from these 



MASSACHUSETTS BA T'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT. loi 

and other orders, we may look to this enterprise in grain-raising- as 
the nucleus of more than one town. It seems probable that Eng- 
lish Grass meadow in Waterbury, now in Plymouth, was one of the 
meadows early sought out for raising grain by some Farmingtonian. 
If cotton has ever been king, far-seeing Governor Hopkins was 
the first to recognize it, for, in 1640, he undertook "the furnishing 
and setting forth a vessel to those parts where the said comodity was 
to be had, that a trade of Cotton Wooll be set upon and attempted." 
This vessel went and came with itscargo of "cotton wool," and this 
name for cotton was in general iise in Connecticut after 1830. Thus 
early was an order for the preservation of the forests sent forth, 
that the material for the supply of pipe-staves remain undimin- 
ished. The export of pipe-staves was an important and extensive 
industry and regulated with great care. The staves were to be four 
inches broad, four feet and four inches long, half an inch in thick- 
ness besides the sap, and if under four inches in breadth they were 
to go for half staves. A supply of linen cloth was desirable — 
experience had thus early taught them that much land lay about 
that might be improved in hemp and flax. To this end, every family 
was ordered to procure and plant, that year, one spoonful of Eng- 
lish hemp-seed in fruitful soil. This was for seed-supply for the 
year following, wherein every family, although no cattle were kept, 
was ordered to sow ten perches; if any cattle, twenty perches; if 
draft cattle, one rood of hemp, or flax. 

Country rates, "yet behind unpayed," were to be accepted in 
merchantable Indian corn at three shillings the bushel; other 
indebtedness of labor, or contract, or commodity, at three shillings 
four pence the bushel. 

That the fear of the Indians was not appalling, appears from 
the fact that six men were sent into the Mohegan country to plant 
corn near Uncas, and were to remain until the harvest should be 
over. It will thus be seen how far away the colonists were reach- 
ing to occupy the meadows, even in 1640, and so the suggestion 
already made, that Waterbury, as an occupied locality, is a number 
of years older than it has been accounted will not be deemed unwor- 
thy of consideration. 

Among the laws of 1640, is the following: "It is Ordered that 
what p'son or p'sons w"'in this jurisdiction shall, after September, 
1641, drinke any other Tobacco but such as is or shall be planted 
within these libertyes, shall forfeit for every pound so spent five 
shillings, except they have license from the Courte." 

The first land bestowed upon any individual by the government, 
was Fisher's Island. It was bestowed under its present name, and 



J02 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

at his own request, upon John Winthrop, subject to the "public good 
of the Country and trade of fishing: or salt and such like." 

The grasp of the government upon the individual in those mat- 
ters in which he might be siipposed to be a law unto himself, must 
have been extremely irksome. His very apparel was subjected to 
restraint in material, in cost, and in form; his labor was under the 
law of hours and his rewards were fixed. No man might give or 
receive more than the sum determined by the General Court, except 
he abide the censure of that court — but this law was unpopular and 
soon repealed. The selling prices for most commodities were given, 
— and the Indian was to receive less for his corn than the white man 
might take. Rumors of war floated in. Mr. Ludlow, down at Fair- 
field, had been told by a friendly sachem that the Indians of Mid- 
dlctown, Narragansett and elsewhere, had a combined plot for des- 
troying the English. A Long Island Indian revealed the plot to 
Mr. Eaton, at New Haven, and a Connecticut River Indian told of 
it. How unfriendly all the Indians were ! Mr. Saltonstall, whose 
lands lay above Windsor, promised to lend the Country two pieces 
of ordnance — " vSakers or Minions." These pieces of ordnance 
undoubtedly came in the forty-ton bark, in 1635, when twenty pas- 
sengers were " to go plant at Connecticut." The Bay was immed- 
iately " writt " unto to further the prosecution, or persecution, of the 
Indians. All fire arms were to be made perfect. A magistrate 
alone might receive a sachem, if he had but two men with him. 
For the first time — this was in August of 1642— a guard of forty 
men was to attend the meeting every vSabbath and lecture-day 
"complete in their arms," and the members of the court took an 
oath to keep secret its doings. The Indians were gathering for 
some purpose, supposed to be warlike, about Tunxis, or present 
Farmington. The most stringent enactments were issued: The 
Englishman might not deliver to any Indian, articles that he had 
contracted for; much less do any work for him in iron or steel, or 
even buy his venison; sixty " halfe Pickes " were ordered, to be of 
ten feet length, at least, in the wood, and the watching and warding 
were set in force with new zeal. A month passed by in quiet, and 
then ninety coats were ordered to be made defensive against Indian 
arrows, by being basted with cotton wool. Governor Hopkins's ship 
had come in; hence, the supply of " cotton wool." Six weeks went 
by. No harm came from Tunxis or other Indians, and, on the first 
of December 1642, the Capital Laws of the Colony, twelve in num- 
ber, were promulgated. 

At this date, that " master-piece of woman's wit," Mrs. Hutchin- 
son, appears to have been dwelling on the river, for Dr. Bray 



MASSACHUSETTS BAY'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT. 103 

Rossiter tries to collect a bill of ;^24o from her, but accepts ^^23, bv 
order of Court. So attractive had the Indians become in three 
months' time to certain of the inhabitants that they took up their 
abode with them, and the Court found it expedient to enact a 
penalty for such abiding; with the Indians; making it at least three 
years' imprisonment in the "house of correction," besides fine and 
corporal punishment; and no man might make any " arrowheads" 
for Indians under penalty of a ten pound fine, and tribute was 
demanded from Long Island Indians also. 

In 1643 a weekly market was established, to be held every Wed- 
nesday at Hartford. This was for all manner of commodities, 
merchandise, and cattle. Highway surveyors were appointed, with 
liberty to call out every team and person fit for labor one day in the 
year to work, especially on the ways which were between town 
and town. The Grand Jury of twelve persons was ordered, and the 
foundations of the family state were considered. It was declared 
that " the prosperity and well-being of commonwealths did much 
depend iipon the well government and ordering of particular 
families " and, as this " could not be expected where the rules of God 
were neglected in laying the foundation of a family state," it was 
ordered that no person remaining under the government of parents, 
masters or guardians " should make or give entertainment to any 
motion or suit in way of marriage without the knowledge and 
consent of those to whom they stood in such relation," neither 
should any third person intermeddle in the matter. 

The commissioners of the United Colonies, in session at Boston, 
in October, 1643, decided that Miantinomo be delivered up to be 
murdered by his captor, Uncas. The harrowing story rises up again 
and again, and we can only cry, "Oh, why was this thing permitted ?" 
Neither timidity nor fear can wholly account for it. Fearing that 
the Narragansetts would seek to avenge the death of their sachem, it 
was ordered that eight men be sent to Mohegan to defend Uncas, and 
that each town prepare itself for defensive war. It was forbidden 
" to sell for day," or trust any Indian with goods or commodities, and 
the meeting-house guard was increased to one man from every 
family in which there was a soldier, who was to carry a "muskett, 
pystoll, or some peece," with powder and shot, to each meeting. 
The forfeit was twelve pence for every neglect — and forty pounds 
were paid to Mr. Fenwick for repairs on the fort at Saybrook. In 
December, 1643, there was kept a Day of Humiliation. This day 
seems to have been popular. In January, because of the state of 
their native Country, it was decided that there should be monthly a 
day of humiliation, " according to the course of their neighbors at 
New Haven." Wednesdav was the dav. 



I04 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

The inhabitants were ordered to bring- in their measures and 
yards and weights once in the year, to be tried and compared with 
the standard. Only sealed measures might be used— and only 
measures of seasoned wood might be sealed — and if any measure 
was found too little, the "scale was to be cutte out." Persons were 
forbidden to selP'Wync and vStrong Water " without license from 
the " p'ticuler Court," or any two magistrates. It had become custom- 
ary to sell the forbidden articles from vessels on the river, and from 
houses. In June, 1644, for the benefit of many strangers and pas- 
sengers (thus incidentally giving us a picture of the growth of inter- 
course), one sufficient inhabitant in each town was to keep an " Ordi- 
nary, for provisioning and lodging in comfortable manner; that 
strangers and passengers might know where to resort." The inhab- 
itants were to choose the men for this service, and two magistrates 
were to decide upon the fitness of the men for the work. It was at 
this time — eight years after the settlement — that the law was 
enacted requiring parents to certify to the Town Clerk, within three 
days after the birth of a child, the date of its birth, and every inan 
within three days after his marriage, the date of that marriage. 
For ever}?- default, the penalty was five shillings. The Register was 
to receive sixpence for recording the day of the marriage and two 
pence for the day of the birth. 

The order concerning trading with the Indians was repealed, 
and Uncas, "who hath bine a friend to the English," might enter 
the house of a magistrate or a trader, with twenty men, and his 
brother with ten; other sache-ms, if they came not with above four 
men. 

In this year, James Hallet, an unfortunate soul of Windsor, for 
his theft, was to restore tenfold " for that should be proved against 
him, and to be branden in the hand, the next Trayening day, at 
Windsor." Up to this date, about six cases of corporal punishment 
are to be met with. The stocks at Windsor, and the pillory at Hart- 
ford, had been made to do duty. There had been one case of brand- 
ing in the cheek the letter R, and perhaps two cases of whipping 
" at the cart's tail," at Hartford. 

In October, 1644, we find six towns within Connecticut colony. 
They are Hartford, Windsor, Wethersfield, vStratford, Uncoa or 
Fairfield, and vSouthampton on Long Island. The latter town had 
sought admission. We learn the number by the appointment of 
two men in every town within the jurisdiction to demand of every 
family what it would give for the maintenance of scholars at Cam- 
bridge, formerly Newtown. This free-will offering, largely in corn, 
was, for many years, gathered annually into the place prepared for 



MASSACHUSETTS BA Y'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT. 105 

it, and at the convenient time, it, or its value, was sent up to " that 
Schoole of the Prophets wch now is" — Harvard College. 

Before the end of the year 1644, Connecticut had overfilled the 
markets of Plymouth and Massachusetts Colonies with grain, and 
a company of exporting' merchants seems to have been formed, 
chief of whom were our enterprising Governor Hopkins and Mr. 
William Whiting. To them, and to them only, was corn to be sold 
to go out of the river, for two years, and the prices for wheat, 
rye, and pease were regulated for them. Cattle and " Swyne " 
above half a year old, were to be ear-marked or branded and regis- 
tered in the town book. 

From the beginning, the possession of the fortification and lands 
at the river's mouth had been desired, and in the agreement for 
their purchase, which was entered into in this year, Mr. Fenwick 
was to receive two pence per bushel for all grain that should be 
exported out of the river for ten years, and six pence per hundred 
for all "biskett " so exported. For every hog that was killed in any 
of the towns on the river, twelve pence per annum. For every sow 
or mare that was in the towns, the same sum; and twenty shillings 
for every hogshead of beaver traded out of the Jurisdiction, " and 
paste away down the River." The payments were to be in beaver, 
wampum, wheat, barley or pease, at the most common and indiffer- 
ent rates. Stringent measures were taken to prevent collusive deal- 
ings, and the concealing of stock, with penalties annexed. This was 
a very heavy tax upon the five towns. Hartford had added to her 
weekly market two fairs in the year, one in May, the other in Sej^- 
tember. 

In 1645 we find the colony taking the most vigorous measures 
"for the enlardgement of the libertyes of the Patent for the Juris- 
diction," for, in the sale made by Mr. Fenwick, he did not include 
the jurisdiction, although he promised to secure it, if he coiild. That 
he failed, and that he was under some pecuniary obligation to the 
country because of this failure, may be fairly inferred from a clause in 
his will, in which he leaves ^500 to the country, contingent upon 
Governor Hopkins's approval. The story of the patent and charter, 
if it could be clearly told, would be of very great interest. 

For five years little Farmington had been a plantation under the 
name of Tunxis, but on the first of December, 1645, she was given 
her English name, her bounds were established, and town rights 
conferred. Saybrook, or " Seabrooke," was added to the towns, 
making the number eight in 1645. But we may not linger in this 
interesting search, but must pass quickly over the field covering 
the period down to the beginning of our own plantation, merely 



io6 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

mentioning that in 1646 our first " Body of Laws " was to be 
"drawn forth" by Mr. Ludlow (Fairfield therefore was probably 
the place where the work was done), that the destruction of a wolf 
was rewarded with ten shillings, that no man might let any land to 
the Indians, because " they mixed themselves in their labors with 
the English," and that the delivery of Miantinomo to Uncas caused 
the sending forth of forty men in this year, for " warrs," and for the 
support of Uncas; after which the knapsacks, pouches and powder 
were gathered up and delivered to Mr. Talcott. 

Whatever the formula may have been for the planting of planta- 
tions, we have not found it. Middletown is the ninth in number, 
although nearly six years of plantation life passed, as in our own 
case, before it became a town. It must be mentioned that the 
business of whale fishing dates back to the year 1647, and that the 
probable pioneer in that business was Mr. Whiting. The company 
were to have seven unmolested years to make their fortunes in, but 
Mr. Whiting died within the first year. 

It was in March, at the very close of the year 1647, that Sims- 
bury was to be purchased by the country, to be disposed of to 
inhabitants of Windsor, and the purchase was to be repaid by those 
that should enjoy it. 

The first trace of witchcraft that the writer has noticed, appears 
in December of 1648, when the "Jury found a Bill of Inditement " 
against "Mary Jonson, on her own confession." 

New London, in its formative stages, dates back to the sending 
of men to perpetuate the conquest of the Pequots, directly after the 
war. In 1648 Mr. John Winthrop was appointed magistrate there. 
The next year its bounds were laid and a court erected, and the 
Indians were not to set any traps within the bounds; but hunting 
and fishing, except upon the Sabbath day, were allowed to them in 
all the towns at that date. Faire Harbour was the first name chosen 
by the court for the town, but because it was an excellent harbor 
and a fit place for future trade, and also the only place that the 
English had possessed in Connecticut by conquest (and the court 
added that it was by a very just war upon that great and warlike 
people, the Pequots), and in memory of London, the new town, 
"settled upon the fair River of Monhegin in the Pcquot country," 
was called New London. 

The earliest mention of Stamford, in Connecticut colony, is in 
1649. John Whittmore, late of Stamford, had been killed by the 
Indians. The court judged it " lawful and according to God in way 
of revenge of his blood," to make war upon the natives in and about 
the premises. They consulted with New Haven and orde-ed forty- 
five Connecticut men to prepare for the war. 



MA SSA CHUSETTS BA Y'S PL A NT A TION IN CONNEGTIC UT. 107 

In November, 1649, East Hampton, on Long- Island, was 
"accepted and entertained " under the government, it being "their 
importunate desire." Samuel vSmith and others of Wethersfield had 
a ship at that port ready for her first voyage, and desired to freight 
it with pipe-staves. The 19th of December, 1649, was Thanksgiving 
day. 

In 1650 foreigners were not to retail any goods within the juris- 
diction, nor were their goods to be retailed by any one. June nth 
was Thanksgiving day, and in November of the same year, on a 
AVednesday, there was another Thanksgiving day. In June of 1650 
certain men of Hartford asked leave for a plantation at Norwalk. 
If the way for such an undertaking " was clear and good," and the 
number and quality of the men engaged in it were such as might 
rationally carry on the work to the advantage of the "publique 
welfare and peace," and the people were willing to look after their 
own defense and safety, and the divisions of lands were made 
according to just rules approved by a committee appointed by the 
court, and the people would pay their just proportion of public 
charges, this plantation was allowed, and in 165 1 it reached town 
estate. 

At this date, 165 1, and for several years before, families and 
small companies of families had been and were living remote from 
the several towns, and to these solitary dwellers and scattered ham- 
lets we are able to trace a considerable number of the towns, both 
early and late, and others, that we cannot follow, doubtless owe 
their origin directly to some advance dweller in the wilds, who 
went with or without permission. 

In October of 165 1, the people were building the great bridge at 
Hartford, and a day of fasting and humiliation was kept, because 
of "some diseases or infection," that was among- their "neighbors 
and friends of the Massachusetts." 

The beginning of 1653 found the Government greatly interested 
in the preservation of the people in and about Saybrook, because 
of the Indians, and apprehensions regarding the Dutch — England 
and Holland being at war. They were ordered to gather the scat- 
tered families into the town. The "Corporation in England " sent 
arms and ammtmition for the United Colonies, of which Connecti- 
cut received to the value of sixty pounds. The Indians near all 
plantations were compelled to testify their fidelity to the English 
by delivering up their guns and other arms to the Governor or the 
Magistrate. They were not to walk in the night, except with a 
message to the English, and then they were to deliver themselves 
up to the watch, and were to be shot by the watch, if they did not. 



,o8 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

On the first of March, 1653, Governor Haynes died. In 1654, by 
order of Parliament, the colony was expected to " demeane itself 
against the Dutch, as an enemy to the Commonwealth of England." 
Accordingly, it sequestered in England's name " the Dutch house, 
the Hope, with all the lands, buildings, and fences thereunto 
belonging." "Barbados Lic|Uors, commonly called Rum, Kill Devill 
or the like," had reached the colonies at this time, and the use of 
them had made sad havoc among the Indians, so that the most pro- 
hibitory laws i^ossible were enacted. The rapid deterioration of the 
natives seems to date from the importation of these liquors. Wars 
and rumors of wars filled the horizon. " Oliver, Lord Protector of 
England," wrote a letter to the General Court in relation to a pro- 
posed expedition that stirred the colonists deeply. Uncas himself 
began to make complaints of unfair treatment from the English, 
in the taking of his lands. The United Colonies resolved 
upon war with Ninigret, and forty-five men were called forth to the 
Niantic country. They were to meet in Hartford and there begin 
their march. The want of an able interpreter had prevented the 
conveyance of the knowledge of God to the natives, and duly con- 
sidering " the glory of God and the everlasting welfare of those 
poore, lost, naked sonnes of Adam," the Court " wrott " unto Thomas 
Mynor of Pequot to send his son John to Hartford, that he might 
be educated to assist the elders to interpret the things of God to 
them.* And here we meet the very familiar name of Daniel Porter. 
He was to be allowed and paid out of the public treasury, as a 
salary for one year, six pounds, and in addition six shillings a jour- 
ney to each town upon the river, " to exercise his arte of chiur- 
geric." 

The first mention that is made of the Housatonic River is in 
1656, when it is called the Paugasitt River. The jurisdiction rights 
of Connecticut over the region embraced by this river are not evi- 
dent to us, and were not to the colony itself, for at the date last 
given, Stratford requested that their bounds to the northward 
might be established, and the answer was, that the bounds should 
be "twelve miles northward by the Paugasitt River," if the juris- 
diction had the right of its disposal. 

In 1656, we make the acquaintance, slight though it be, of our 
friend William Judd, the eldest of the five Judd brothers who cast 
their lot in with Waterbury at its beginning. He was in this year 
made a freeman. We learn, also, that wolf-pits were constructed to 

* This lad, John Minor, sent to Hartford from New London, was one of the pioneer settlers of Wood- 
bury. It was he who was upon the committee for establishing the bounds between Mattatuck and Wood 
bury in i68o. 



MASSACHUSETTS BA T'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT. 109 

catch wolves, because of the bounty derived from their capture, and 
that the penalty for stealing a wolf from the pit, to either Indians 
or English, was ten shillings, or six stripes of whipping, and that 
no town might entertain a Quaker, Ranter, Adamite, or other noto- 
rious heretic, above fourteen days, tinless the town so choosing to 
entertain, pay five pounds per week for its safe harboring of them. 
We rejoice to assure the reader that this law did not arise within 
the heart, or brain, or at the hands of our Connecticut Colony, but 
was adopted by the United Colonies at the suggestion of the gov- 
ernor and magistrates of MassachtLsetts Colony. From the same 
source came the law of this year, forbidding the sale of a horse to an 
Indian, or any boats or "barkes," or any tackling belonging there- 
unto. It is agreeable to find that Mamanto, probably our good 
Indian of " Mantoe's House Rocks," twenty-four years later, in 1680, 
was by special grant of the Court permitted to have a horse, and 
he was perhaps (with a good degree of probability) employed with 
his horse as special messenger between Farmington and Mattatuck 
in that year of our house-building, for the rocks were named for 
him here, and the natural and artificial marks of his horse were 
recorded in Farmington.* 

In 1656, in the three river towns there were 447 land owners, 
whose estates were valued at ^47,710. Dr. Daniel Porter's "sal- 
lery" was continued, and a Diitchiuau, whose name was "Mr." 
Lawrence Cornelius, was admitted by New London and the General 
Court an inhabitant of that town, he to have free trade there. Free- 
men were admitted to the colony by the General Court; inhabitants 
were admitted to a town by a major vote of the town. The deputies 
of a town were to give certificates to men desiring to be made free- 
men, that the candidates were of peaceable and honest conversation, 
but the court reserved the right to accept or reject them at its 
pleasure. The qualifications recjuired were, that the candidates 
should be householders who were one-and-twenty years of age, who 
had borne office, or who possessed thirty pounds estate. In the end 
of this year vStephen Hopkins, our first miller, he who built the mill 
which was here in 1680, was made a freeman. In 1656, also, the 
troubles in the church at Hartford culminated. Massachusetts min- 
isters and elders voluntarily proposed to visit that town and counsel 
the opposing parties. A " synnod " was held. 

In May, 1657, sixty-five freemen were added to the list, and the 
Gunn name appears in the colony in the person of Jasper Gunn, 
who v/as freed from training, watching and warding "during his 
practise of physsicke." He had been in Connecticut earlier, cer- 



* See references to Mantow and Momantow on page 30. 



1 1 ^ HIS TOE T OF WA TERB UR F. 

tainl}- in 1648, and in 1649 he was attending the mill at Hartford, 
while Thomas Gunn was a jnryman still earlier. The Gunn family- 
filled an important place in the life of Waterbury in subsequent 
years. 

Indians at Farmington were troublesome in 1657. A "most hor- 
rible murder " was committed by them at that place.* Tekomas, 
Agedowsickf and Wonanntownagun, alias Great James, were to 
be kept in prison as pledges until the murderers should be brought 
forth to trial and judgment. The estate of one Indian was 
sequestered, and the inhabitants of Farmington were to seek out, 
and bring before the governor, Indians who might be suspected of 
the crime, while the Indians themselves in and about Farmington 
were directed to nominate a sachem. It was a serious office to hold, 
that of an Indian sachem, for the English held the "heathen 
prince " strictly accountable for all the crimes committed by his 
tribe; brit in this case at Farmington there seems to have been no 
sachem to bring to account. A fire was also occasioned at the same 
or nearly the same time, by which certain houses were burned; it 
is believed that the houses were owned by William Lewis or 
Francis Browne, or perhaps both. For this fire the Indians of 
Tunksis Sepus or Farmington, mutually pledged themselves to 
make an annual payment to the court for seven years of the full 
sum of eighty fathom of wampum. " Mamanto," (our "Mantow," it 
is thought), was one of the four Indians who signed this agreement. 
A committee was appointed to distribute the payments to Lieutenant 
Lewis and Francis Browne, to make up their loss by fire. This year 
1657 comes to us of Waterbury with a thrill of interest, for this is 
the year in which we have direct and recorded evidence that white 
men, whose names we know, traversed some portion at least, of our 
valley; men who a little later were active in preparations for its 
settlement, and one of whom, John Stanly, lived an honorable and 
active life in our community until after 1700; the other, John 
Andrews, died while preparations for settlement were in progress. 

The patience of the law-givers must have been greatly tried 
when Indians who had a grievance met in court, each sachem 
to plead his own case. The court wearied with their speeches, 
when on one occasion Uncas and a sachem named Foxon "justi- 
fied in many words." Great wisdom was required to bestow just 
verdicts, when present troubles were complicated with old feuds 

*In the diary of John Hull, under date of April 23d, in this year, he tells us that this murder was that 
of an English woman and her maid, and that a little child was sorely w^ounded, "all within their house," 
and that the house was fired, " which also fired some other houses or barns ; " that the Indians, being appre- 
hended, delivered up the murderer, who was most horribly executed. 

+ Another form of Hatchetowsuck ; see pp. 34. 35. 



MASSACHUSETTS BA Y'S PL ANT A TION m CONNECTICUT. 1 1 1 

running back more than a generation, and one is not surprised 
when, Tfter an all-day session of Indian special pleading, the verdict 
was— that the Indians should be left to fight it out among them- 
selves on the other side of the river, but no Englishman's house, per- 
son or property was to be injured. In the beginning of 165S, thirty- 
seven men were formed into a cavalry company, under the name of 
"Troopers." They made choice of their own officers, and the court 
confirmed them. The officers commissioned were a captain, 
lieutenant, "cornet, three corporals" — one of whom was Nicholas 
Olmsted, one of the five men who ordered Waterbury's first steps 
in town'ways— and a quartermaster. This company of troopers 
was formed from the men of the three original towns. It was 
in March, 1657, in the very last days of the year, that the order 
was issued forbidding any persons to "embody themselves into 
church estate without consent of the General Court and approba- 
tion of the neighbor churches." There was a provision in this 
law, out of which grew in later years, within the townships, the 
winter privileges, and the church societies, which in turn re- 
solved themselves into towns again. The provision was that the 
order should not " take place upon such as were hindred by any 
just impediments [such as our Naugatuck river] on the Sabbath 
day from the publicke assemblies by weather or water, and the 

like." 

In 1658 the court was more tried with the "differences " that had 
broken out in the churches at Hartford, and in other towns, than 
with the Indians themselves, and sternly ordered an "utter cessa- 
tion of all further p'-secution " by the church at Hartford towards 
the withdrawers from them until the court decided the differences 
between them. The court could not, or would not, arbitrate these 
matters. It was greatly buffeted with ecclesiastical "strikes," and 
sent the matter, as they did Miantonomo, up to "The Bay," or 
rather, sent for the "Bay" elders to come across country to Hart- 
ford. 

No less than seventy men were made free before the Court of 
Election in May, and the great number caused tumult and trouble, 
so that thereafter freemen were admitted at the October court ; and 
here we meet for the first time with the "sciuire," so familiar to our 
ears a score of years ago, and now well nigh obsolete. The new 
recorder, Mr. Daniel Clark, makes use of it as a prefix to the name 
of ^Ir. Winthrop. 

The Farmington Indians were entertaining strange Indians at 
this tim.e— contrary to their agreement with the English, " when they 
sat down " there— and carrying on hostilities, thereby endangering 



1 1 2 EISTOR Y OF WA TERB UR T. 

life by bullets shot into the town, and Thomas Judd, the father of 
the five young men of that name who came to Waterbury as pro- 
prietors, was on the committee to inform the Indians that they 
were required " to provide another place for their habitation and 
desert the place wherein they were then garrisoned." Tn this year, 
1658, "the season was intemperate, the harvest thin, and there was a 
sore visitation, by sickness in several plantations," and Governor 
Edward Hopkins died. The act against the Quakers did not long 
survive on Connecticut soil. It was modified in such manner that 
if one was "found fomenting his wicked Tenets and was legally 
convicted to be disturbing the public peace," that Quaker was 
to be " dealt with " by " fine, or banishment, or corporal pun- 
ishment." 

One of the most weighty matters coming before the law-givers 
again and again and continually, related to the selling of spirit- 
ous liquors. Laws were enacted regulating; laws prohibiting; laws 
repealing laws; but the question did not seem answerable to law. 
At last they tried the experiment of permitting Indians to have 
cider, provided it should be " drank " before the eyes of the seller 
thereof, in order to prevent excess, but this liberty was soon with- 
drawn, and no man might even give any Indian cider. The first 
intimation of negro slavery is met with in the law of 1660, that 
neither Indian nor "negar" servants should be required to train, 
watch, or ward in the colony. The laws of this year were 
especiall}^ clear and practical. No person might be admitted an 
inhabitant of a town unless he was known to be of an honest con- 
versation and was accepted by the major part of the town. A sec- 
ond small troop of horse, of eighteen men, was permitted to be gath- 
ered out of Fairfield, Stratford and Norwalk. No inhabitant could 
sell his house and lands without offering them first for sale to the 
town in which they were situated. The above was one of the laws 
which was cited as being contrary to English law, when, at a 
later period, the charter was in peril. No man or woman could live 
more than two years in Connecticut, if he or she had wife or hus- 
band " in foreign parts." Every town in the colony w^as ordered to 
send forth its Indians a quarter of a mile away from the town. The 
law forbidding to sell fire-arms to Indians was still unrepealed; 
nevertheless, the Indians possessed guns, for, at this time, laws 
were made regulating their fire-arms, as, that Englishmen might 
seize any guns brought in by them, to be redeemed by the Indians 
on payment of six shillings each; and a little later, in 1661, they 
had free liberty to carry them through towns, if not above ten men 
were in company. 



MASSACHUSETTS BA Y'S PLANTATION IN CONNECTICUT. 113 

It was at this time that the order went forth causing sales, 
grants, bargains, and mortgages of lands to be in writing and placed 
upon record, duly witnessed by one witness and the recorder. 

The Indian name of the Housatonic river was merged into the 
Stratford river in 1660, for Dr. "Bray Rossiter— who had been at 
Hartford in attendance upon "John Talcott in his sickness "—had 
applied to the court to sanction his purchase of lands at " Paugusset, 
on Stratford River." His rccpiest was granted; he was given per- 
mission to buy another hundred acres, and Connecticut colony 
accepted the lands thus accpiired under its government. Hunting- 
ton, Long Island, also was received to its "power and protection." 

In 1 66 1, the Colony was very active and deeply absorbed in car- 
rying out the desire of its corporate heart — to obtain from King 
Charles II. the long desired charter. Everything was made ready 
for that event. The financial part of the business enterprise was 
secured. It was five hundred pounds. An address to the King was 
made ready by Governor Winthrop, and a petition prepared by a 
committee, and, with the money, the address, and the petition, and 
a long and minutely worded letter of instructions in the premises, 
the Governor set forth on a voyage to England, at once momentous 
in its hopes and results to the Colony. 

In his address Governor Winthrop assures King Charles that the 
" Fathers of the Colony had very pious and public ends in view, when 
they transported themselves, with their wives and children, unto 
this western world "—even the " propagation of the blessed Gosple 
of the Lord Tesus amongst the Heathen," as well as " the farther 
extent and honor of the British Monarchy." He then reminds him 
of the full and free consent that his father, Charles I., gave, together 
with his gracious " L'" Pattents," to them of Massachusetts Bay, and 
later explains how Connecticut came to be settled, and that the lands 
were purchased of " Indian sachems," kindly explaining to the King 
the fact that Indian sachems were " Heathen Princes," and then 
adds that when the sad and unhappy times of troubles and wars 
began in England, his subjects on the Connecticut River could only 
"bewaile w''' sighes and mournful teares." Then, writing for the 
people, he declares that they "have ever since hid themselves 
behind the mountains, in that desolate desert [the Connecticut Val- 
ley !] as a people forsaken, choosing rather to sit solitary and wait 
only upon the Divine Providence for protection [that is, without 
a charter] than to apply themselves to the changes of powers 
[the Commonwealth and Oliver Cromwell], assuring his majesty 
that his subjects had kept their hearts, as well as their stations, free 
from all illegal engagements, and entire to the interests of their 
8 



J HISTORY OF WATERBTJRY. 

Kino-." Presently, he implores favor and gracious protection, and 
asks'' his acceptance of the colony, reminding the king that it is 
" his own Colony, a little branch of his mighty Empire," and explains 
many things that his poor pilgrims have done for the glory of Eng- 
land. The address makes most humble apology for the colonists, in 
that they had "publickly and solemnly proclaimed and declared for 
his majesty in Connecticut, before a form and express order for such 
testimony of allegiance had arrived by the ships from England," 
and closes with the hope that his majesty will be pleased to excuse 
the poverty that has nothing to present the King of England from 
the wilderness, but hearts and loyal affections. It ends with the most 
profound professions of loyalty and submission and devout suppli- 
cations to " His Eternal Majesty, the King of Heaven and Earth," to 
pour down temporal and spiritual blessings upon the "Royal 
Throne" of Charles H. This address, written by Governor Win- 
throp, was placed in the hands of a committee which was empow- 
ered to "compile or methodize the Instrument." Hence, the very 
remarkable production. However, it accomplished its purpose, and 
the charter was received at Hartford, with honest acclamation of 
joy, and " publiquely read in audience of ye Freemen, and declared 
to belong to them and their successors " on the 9th of October, 1662. 
It had been diily signed and sealed on April 23rd; had been pub- 
licly exhibited in Boston in vSeptember, and was delivered in Hart- 
ford for safe keeping, into the hands of Mr. Willys, Captain John 
Talcott, of Waterbury interest, and Lieutenant John Allyn, persons 
chosen for that office by the freemen. A " Charter Keeper's Oath " 
was administered to the three men, and the wheels of government 
were once more adjusted by the General Assembly of assistants and 
deputies who " established all officers in the Colony, both civil and 
military, in their respective places and power." 

A new era, bright with satisfied longings, and brilliant with hope 
had dawned. It is at this date that we bid farewell to the General 
Court and advance under the order of the General Assembly, which 
frequently steps back into the old ways, and calls itself always the 
Court, and frequently the General Court, but its marching orders 
are with few exceptions under General Assembly. 

It is quite impossible fully to appreciate the situation of the 
colonists either before or after the charter was obtained. Hitherto 
every step had been taken with secret distrust and often with per- 
ceptible hesitation, but always in the hope that Mr. Fenwick would 
be able to transfer to them whatever jurisdiction he either held or 
might be supposed to hold by virtue of patent, at the time when he 
sold to them the fort. But now all was changed ! Everything was 



MASS A CHU8ETTS BA T'S PL ANT A TION IN CONNECTICUT. 1 1 5 

tinged with hope, and the chartered colony was afloat on the sea of 
success. It grew in a day, in a manner that must have filled the 
river people with becoming pride; the doubting towns came hurry- 
ing \\v> to Hartford for shelter under charter; for the Englishman 
respects law and reverences the law-giver. It was on the first day 
after the charter was proclaimed that the Hartford Train Band was 
given precedence over all other military organizations, a precedence 
that it has never wholly lost. Southold, Stamford, Greenwich, and 
even Guilford, through a portion of its inhabitants, came under 
jurisdiction. The court declared its claim, under patent, to all of 
Long Lsland, received West Chester as a " member of its corpora- 
tion," and conferred plantation rights upon " Homonoscetts," or 
Killing-worth, as it could maintain thirty families. The General 
Assembly was bus}' with new enactments fitting the new environ- 
ment, casting off laws that the colony had outgrown, and removing 
restraints no longer desirable. 

When, in 1664, New Haven colony submitted to the inevitable, 
and came, in her own proud way, to the point of yielding up her 
colonial rights, the heart of Connecticut throbbed with fullness of 
satisfaction, and the married life of the colonies has been, from that 
time to this, not free from troubles, but, on the whole, an estate for 
the better for both parties. New Haven gave up her colonial name 
and her individuality, but never relinquished her influence and her 
formative power. Two years later, in 1666, the counties of Hartford, 
New Haven, New London and Fairfield were formed. Waterbury, 
naturally, took her place, when she came into being, within Hart- 
ford county, for, while its eastern and western bounds were not 
given, its north bound was that of Windsor and Farmington; its 
south, the "South end of ye bounds of Thirty Miles Island," now 
Haddam. County courts were also appointed for each county, to be 
held twice in the year. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

WAS THE DISCOVERY OF MATTATUCK DUE TO THE SEARCH FOR METALS? 
MININC RIGHTS OF 1 65 7 IN THE VALLEY OF THE MATTATUCK 

RIVER POSSIBLE MINING INDUSTRIES INTERRUPTED BY INDIAN 

TROUBLES AT FARMINGTON WATERBURY's MINE OF I 735 REST- 
LESSNESS OF SETTLERS AT FARMINGTON AND ELSEWHERE LANDS 

AT BRISTOL GRANTED IN 1663 THE FIRST STEP TOWARD WATER- 
BURY IN 1670 DEACON STEPHEN HEART'S FARM IN MATTATUCK 

BEFORE IT BECAxME A PLANTATION THREE MEN OF FARMINGTON 

VIEW MATTATUCK TWENTY-SIX MEN PETITION THE GENERAL 

COURT FOR A PLANTATION COMMITTEE APPOINTED TO VIEW 

THE LANDS — ITS RETURN TO THE COURT THE GENERAL COURT 

APPOINTS A COMMITTEE TO REGULATE AND ORDER A PLANTA- 
TION AT MATTATUCK. 

IT will probably never be possible for any investigator to deter- 
mine what Englishman first beheld the lands on which we 
dwell in Waterbnry, or to declare the purpose that led him 
into the valley through which ran the Mattatuck river. Historians 
have hitherto accorded to the territory no charms beyond those 
known to the hunter ; and it has been thought that even the 
Indians held the region in avoidance, except for its animal life, 
down to the time when it was solicited of the General Assembly 
for a plantation by certain men of Farmington ; but there are indi- 
cations that Indians dwelt here, and it is known that land was laid 
out here before the establishment of the plantation. 

That the Waterbury of to-day owes its eminence among manu- 
facturing towns to the working of metals, no man may deny. That 
the discovery of Mattatuck may be attributed to the search for its 
supposed metallic treasures, is quite within the bounds of proba- 
bility. Indeed, we have facts recorded which in the line of 
evidence indicate that energetic search for metals was made here 
at least seventeen years before the region was selected for a planta- 
tion. The Winthrop name of two centuries and more ago stood for 
so much in the way of endeavor and enterprise, that no one can be 
very much surprised to hear it connected with even the discovery 
of Waterbury. On the 13th of May, 1651, John Winthrop, Jr., was 
living at Pequot (New London). From that place he sent a letter 
to the General Court on a subject that was of special interest to 
himself. In this letter Mr. Winthrop wrote : 



CONNECTICUT'S PLANTATION AT MATTATUCK. 117 

There hath been earnest motions to me from some well-willers to the com- 
mon good, to make some search and trial for metals in this country, and there is 
hope that there might be a stock gathered for that purpose, if there were encour- 
agements from the several jurisdictions. I have therefore made bold to propound 
the enclosed grant to yourself and the court ; professing this, that I neither know 
nor have heard of any mines or metals within this jurisdiction, for I have not yet 
made any search, but only propound it for encouragement to any that will be 
adventurers and join in the undertaking of such a design. 

Mr.Winthrop then cites "The Bay" as an example, giving Lynn 
and "Ntiberry" as two places where he knows that lead has been 
found ; " but," he adds. 

That at Lynn, being challenged by the Towne, and so neare the Iron worke 
that takes tip all the wood, that it cannott bee wrought there; and the Towne hath 
beene at charge for the finding of the veine, but it cannot bee found, and so they 
are discouraged ; for it was onely loose peeces that were found. I doe not much 
desire to have anything put in about gold and silver, yet, if it be put in, it may 
incourage some. 

The action of the court on the receipt of the letter quoted from, 
follows : 

Whereas, in this rocky country, amongst these mountains and stony hills, there 
are probabilities of mines of metals and minerals, the discovery whereof may be 
for the great benefit of the country, in raising a staple commodity, and whereas, 
John Wenthrop, Esq., doth intend to be at charge and adventure for the search 
and discovery of such mines and minerals— for the encouragement whereof, and of 
any that shall adventure with the said John Wenthrop, Esq., in the said business, 
It is therefore ordered by this court, that if the said John Wenthrop, Esq., shall 
discover, set upon and maintain, or cause to be found, discovered, set upon and 
maintained such mines of lead, copper or tin, or any minerals, as antimony vitriall, 
black lead, alum, stone-salt, salt springs or any other the like, within this jurisdic- 
tion, and shall set up any work for the digging, washing, melting, or any other 
operation about the said mines or minerals as the nature thereof requireth, that 
then, the said John Wenthrop, Esq., his heirs, associates, partners, or assignes, 
shall enjoy forever the said mines, with the lands, wood, timber and waters within 
two or three miles of the said mine, for the necessary carrying on of the works and 
mamtaining of workmen and provision of coals for the same; provided it be not 
within the bounds of any Town already, or any particular persons propriety, nor in 
or bordering upon any place that shall or may by the court be judged fit to make a 
plantation of. 

Within six years from the date of John Winthrop's letter, John 
Standley and John Andrews, two men of Farmington, who later 
cast their lot with the men of Waterbury, had penetrated the wil- 
derness to the west of their township, and from a hill had carried 
with them to Farmington a mineral substance which was believed 
to be black lead. The record, as we have it, is very incomplete. 
We are not told that John Standley and John Andrews were pros- 
pecting for metals under the incitement of Winthrop's and the 



Q HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

I lo 

court's encouragement, but we may suggest the probability of it. 
We are not even told that they discovered the hill containing it, but 
simply that they brought the "lead" from a certain hill. Whether 
they were the discoverers of it or not, the fact that the hill with its 
" black lead " was discovered, evidently aroused the Farmingtonians 
of 1657 to action. Two of their number, William Lewis and Samuel 
Steele in that year obtained from three Indians of Farmington 
(whose names upon the Farmington record of the transaction— 
which appears to be the original deed — are written Keoaga[m?] 
Oueromus and Mataneg, or as ordinarily rendered in copies of the 
same, Kepaquamp, Querrimus and Mataneage), "a tract of land 
called Matetacoke, that is to say, the hill from whence John Stand- 
ley and John Andrews brought the black lead." By this deed the 
Indians did not convey their title to the lands. They simply con- 
ferred mining rights in a great circle of land whose diameter was 
sixteen miles, with the hill as its central point. By this grant, or 
lease, they had permission "to dig and carry away" to any extent 
desired ; they could also " build on the land for the use of the 
laborers, but not otherwise improve it." 

Whatever plans may have been made to develop this mine, they 
were doubtless held in abeyance, for it was at this time, in 1657, 
that the "horrible murder," already referred to, took place in Farm- 
ington, that so greatly alarmed the inhabitants.* From this time 
onward, the Farmington Indians were restless, and being recjuired 
by the inhabitants to leave their homes and move on, we can 
understand why the "black lead" was left in its native hill. Where 
this hill was, and is, remains to this day a secret. That it was 
within the bounds of Mattatuck plantation might be inferred from 
the name. It has been considered by historians safe to place it in 
Harwinton. The mention of the fact that Waterbury's bounds 
with Farmington, and with Hartford even, were nearly half a cen- 
tury in getting established, suggests the possibility that in the 
beginning the hill was where its name indicates, and near the north 
line of the Waterbury township of 1686. The Rev. E. B. Hillard in 

* In 1840, Rev. Noah Porter, in his historical address, delivered on the two-hundredth anniversary of the 
settlement of Farmington, tells us that it was the house of John Hart that was desti-oyed by fire, and that in 
the same year Mr. Scott was cruelly murdered. Mr. Julius Gay gives the date of the burning of John Hart's 
house as December 15, 1666. The Mr. Scott referred to was perhaps Joseph, the son of Edmund Scott of 
Waterbury, but his death occurred nearly, if not quite fifty years later. August 18, 1657, the Indians belong- 
ing to Tunksis Sepus, being treated with about the damage done by fire, occasioned by Mesupeno, they 
obliged themselves to pay unto the General Court in October, for the term of seven years, the full sum of 
eighty fathom of wampum. * » * Four Indians signed this agreement in the name and with the consent of the 
rest. Col. Rec. of Conn., Vol. I, p. 303. The Indians did not make prompt payment, and in May, 1660, the 
Court appointed a committee "to take in the consideration of the loss of Lt. Lewis and Francis Browne, and 
according as they judge requisite to make distribution to both parties of that which the Indians have 
engaged to pay yearly to make up their loss by fire until the whole sum be paid in by the Indians." 



CONNECTICUT'S PLANTATION AT MATTATUCK. 119 

liis "Sketches of the History of Plymouth," 18S2, has ventured to 
place it a little north of the Harwinton line, on the east side of the 
highway running past the house of Arthur Cleveland, and as lying 
aboiit half a mile back of the above house. He tells us that " marks 
•of rock-blasting are still apparent, which could have been only for 
mining purposes." 

We find, in Waterbury Town Records, of 1735, "^ place called 
the mine." It was situated "near the upper end of the bounds." 
We further learn that " it was on the west side of the Naugatuck 
River," and that "it was against English Grass Meadow;" and still 
further, we are told by record that " English Grass Meadow is at 
the Mouth of East Branch, or Lead Mine Brook." It is the most 
northern meadow lot, save one — the Plum Trees — within the 
ancient bounds. Both meadow lots were named before 1688. The 
law forbidding persons to acquire title to lands from the natives, 
was not made until 1663, six years after the date of the conveyance 
of the mining rights to Lewis and Steele; hence, its validity as 
recognized in later transactions. 

Since writing the above, a visit to English Grass Meadow has 
been made. It was impossible to mistake the beautiful curved 
meadow, lying at the mouth of the East Branch. Mr. Irwin Fenn, 
who lives in its vicinity, remembers it by its English Grass name. 
It was so called sixty years ago by its then owner, Mr. John Allen. 
It is now owned by Mr. George Gilbert, and is in this August of 1892, 
beautiful with corn, and plentiful with its crops of potatoes and 
grain. Mr. Fenn thinks that the "Plum Trees," were on the East 
Branch itself, and about three-fourths of a mile above English 
Grass Meadow. He remembers when, about fifteen years ago, the 
last of the plum trees that gave name to the meadow were cut 
down. They were, at that time, reduced to a few rods in extent. 
The present owner is Mr. Samuel Baldwin. The region has, from 
time to time, been sought after for its supposed mineral treasures. 
Mining rights have been secured as recently as within about twenty 
years in lands very near the mine of 1735. 

Lewis and Steele evidently received their title to this great 
circle of land as representing a company of men ; for under date 
of June 29, 1665, at a meeting held at Farmington, " there was 
chosen Sarg* vStanly and Sarg* Hart to go to Left. Lewis and 
Eng° vSteel to demand ye Deed of Sale of Mattatuck Land, and 
have it assigned to them In ye behalfe of ye Company, and have 
it Recorded. 

"A treu Copie Transcribed out of ffarmington old Town Book 
pr John Hooker, Regst'." 



i,o HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

In 1 7 12, a committee was appointed by Farmington, with full 
power to lease out to Col. William Partridge and Mr. Jonathan 
Belcher for sixty-eight years, "all their mines except iron and pre- 
cious stones and the fifth part of all oar of silver and gold that 
might be found within the common and sequestered land, not yet 
granted to any particular person or persons." These gentlemen of 
Massachusetts were undoubtedly men of large enterprise. They 
secured to themselves for terms of years varying from eight to 
sixty-eight, the working of all mines, iron excepted, within Farm- 
ington, Wallingford and vSimsbury. In Wallingford and Sitnsbury, 
mineral wealth was known to exist at the period named. In 17 14, 
the General Assembly confirmed the acts of the towns' committees 
in relation thereto, and granted the persons employed in the mines 
exemption from military duties. It is not unreasonable to suggest 
that early Waterbury shared in the same enterprise and that the 
place called " The Mine," was an outcome of that period, if indeed 
it did not date back to the lease of 1657. 

When one looks upon the Farmington meadows of to-day, and 
goes back, in thought, to the time when, in 1672 or 1673, but eighty- 
four men, with their families, inhabited the great township, the 
Indians occupying only their reservation of two hundred acres, 
together with " the little slip, staked out, to avoid contention," the 
question forces itself upon the mind anew : Why were these men 
not content ? The question of land, surely, could not have been a 
serious one; nor were its divisions so arbitrary as to account for the 
spirit of unrest that prevailed in Farmington, as elsewhere. Men 
were not ecpial. The government of towns was in the hands of a 
few men. Few were the changes in the more honorary offices, and 
heavy was the repression felt by the individual, consequent upon 
the letter of the law, whose weight weighed him down more heavily 
than he could bear. Hence the efforts of the individual to seek 
out some tract of land, even if distant from the settlement, where 
he could, at least to his little herd of cattle, speak his mind, with- 
out suffering the consequences. However many other good and 
sufficient reasons there may have been for the continual wandering 
in townships by man, and out of townships by bands of men, we 
think we must look beneath surface indications for the foundations 
whence this spirit of restlessness was upheaved. 

As early as 1663, we find that three or four men had strayed 
away into that portion of Farmington then called Poland — and now 
Bristol — and by permission of the town, had there selected lands to 
be laid out to them when granted by the town. Richard Bronson^ 
Thomas Barnes and Moses Ventrus seem to have been the pioneers 



CONNECTICUT'S PLANTATION AT MATTATUCE. 121 

in securing grants. These grants were followed in 1664 by one of 
twenty acres to our John Lankton. 

In 1670 a movement began, that may be looked upon as the first 
and vital step toward Waterbury, and yet it occurred within the lim- 
its of Farmington itself. Land in Great Swamp was conferred 
upon men of Farmington upon conditions. This Great Swamp lay 
along the branches of the Mattebeset river and was allotted in par- 
cels, varying from twenty to fourteen acres, " through the conde- 
scendency of particular persons in the town to part with something 
which is their right, to persons of lesser estate, on these conditions." 
The conditions were, that the lands were forever to be a part of 
Farmington; "never to be a distinct people from the town without 
their liberty and consent." The land was to return to the town "if 
the people living there should endeavor to rend themselves off from 
the town to be a distinct people of themselves, or, with any other." 
Neither could any man thus endowed with his acres in the Great 
vSwamp make sale of this land until he had lived his four years in 
Farmington, and further, no one was allowed to go there to live 
except he owned the land. Twenty-eight of the men who just four 
years later signed the "Articles Agreed upon for the Settling a Plan- 
tation at Mattatuck," were twenty-eight of the men who had by 
waiting secured for themselves these lands at Great Swamp. In 
1687, the town of Farmington agreed to give Richard Seymour, a 
blacksmith, twenty shillings, as a "gratewety " for his moving to the 
Swamp, and 1686 is the date given by historians for the settlement 
at " Farmington Village in and about Great Swamp." 

We have already given evidence that the region within ten miles 
of Waterbury — at Bristol — was suiificiently well known in 1663 to 
be selected and granted, in part, to three men of Farmington. We 
also know of one colonial grant of a farm that was laid out 
within Waterbury's borders before we have any evidence of a 
design on the part of the men of Farmington to petition for a plan- 
tation here. 

In 1673 the court bestowed upon Deacon vStephen Heart a one 
hundred and fifty acre farm. In the records of 1705 we learn for 
the first time that "this grant was laid out to him within the town- 
ship of Waterbury, which afterward being granted for a plantation, he 
or his heirs relinquished, and it was to be removed to a place upon 
Mattatuck river to the northward of the town there." We may not 
stop to follow this grant. Like the Indians it was compelled to 
move on in advance of townships, being now at the meeting of the 
bounds of Windsor, Simsbury and Farmington, and again sent over 
the Connecticut river into Killingly, where possibly it remained. 



_,2 2 HISTOBT OF WATERBURY. 

We return thanks to this wandering farm for the light it reflects 
from 1705 on 1673. Having thns shown conclusively that land was 
held within the bounds of Mattatuck-in May, 1673, we must give to 
Deacon Stephen Heart the honor of being, so far as known to the 
writer, the first English landed proprietor in Waterbury ; but it 
does not follow that he had no predecessor. We have already 
alluded to the earliest grant, that of Fisher's Island in 1641, to John 
Winthrop. This was soon followed by grants to the soldiers of the 
Pequot Massacre, and from that early date the grants grew rap- 
idly in number, and in size to one at least of one thousand acres. A 
very suggestive grant is that to Thomas Judd and Anthony Haw- 
kins, of four hundred acres in 1661. The evidence has not been 
met, but the suggestion is here offered to a coming investigator 
that the whole or a portion of this land was laid out in present 
Naugatuck, and that this farm gave rise to the name by which that 
territory was known for so many 5'ears while it was a part of Water- 
bury — not Judd's Meadow, but Judd's Meadows. If this should 
prove to be tenable, then Deacon Stephen Heart must give place to 
Deacon Thomas Judd, his fellow townsman. This Deacon Judd of 
Farmington was the father of William, John, Benjamin, Lieuten- 
ant Thomas, Philip and Samuel Judd, every one of whom had some 
part in the settlement of Waterbury. Therefore Deacon Thomas 
Judd's six sons may have been familiar with our hills and valleys, 
even in their boyhood. This view has been taken as one of the pos- 
sibilities of the situation, and may be upheld by several plausible 
facts, one of which is that the Judds must have had a reason for 
not desiring a plantation at Mattatuck; for not a Judd name is to be 
found in the list of the petitioners for it, while, when the planta- 
tion arises on their landed horizon, the entire family rush in as 
planters ! Was this because they had been improving the two hun- 
dred-acre farm — granted to be laid out in not more than four pieces 
— at Judd's Meadows for thirteen years, and fain would keep it from 
the iron hand of a plantation ? And is this an explanation of records 
which reveal to us certain facts that we are unable to account 
for — such expressions in the first book of Proprietors' Records as 
"Butler's House," "Butler's House Brook," "Where Butler's House 
7ifas" when we have no knowledge of any Butler among the early 
inhabitants of Waterbury — a man whose house was a thing of the 
past in 1689 ! Was he the farmer of Judd's Meadows, or was he a 
Stratford Butler and a Quaker, one of the five Quakers in the 
colony at that date, and obliged to move on ? or who was this But- 
ler? Before October 6th, 1673, Thomas Newell vSen'', John Warner, 
Sen'', and Richard vSeamor, all of Farmington, "partly for their own 
satisfaction, and for the satisfaction of some others," came to view 



CONNECTICUT'S PLANTATION AT MATTATUCK. 123 

■" Matitacoocke " in reference to a plantation and made report that 
they " judged it capable of the same." 

October 9th, 1673, twenty-six men, all of Farming-ton, and not a 
Judd of the number, sent up a petition by John "Lankton" to the 
court then in session at Hartford. The following is a copy of that 
petition as it appears in the State Records of Towns and Lands, 
vol. I, page 162. The original papers relating to the period, of 
which this is one, have been carefully preserved by pasting them to 
the leaves of volumes. On holding the leaf on which this petition 
is found to the light, it was seen that upon the back of it had been 
written, " Farming petition for to make Mattacock a plantation, 9 
Octob'" 1673. John Lancton payes for this petition." John Lane- 
ton therefore paid ten shillings for the privilege of having the peti- 
tion read in court, for such had been for eleven years the require- 
ment. 

THE rETITION FOR A TLANTATIOxN. 

To tJie holier d goierall court now siting In Hartford Octobr g, 73 

Honerd gentlemen and fathers we being sensible of our great neede of a com- 
fortable subsistance doe herby make our address to your selfes In order to the 
same Not Questioning your ceare and faitlifulness In y" premisses: allso hoping of 
your freeness and readyness to accomidate your poore supplicants with y* which we 
Judge to be: In your hands: acording to an orderly proseeding we therefore 
whose names are hereafter Inserted to humbly petition your honours to take cong- 
nicance: of our state who want Land to Labour upon: for our subsistance & Now 
having foun4 out a trackt at a place called by ye Indians matitacoock: which we 
aprihend may susfetiently acomidate to make a small plantation: we are therefore 
bould hereby to petition your honors to grant vs y« liberty of planting y« same with 
as many others as may be: capable comfortably to entertaine and as for the pur- 
chasing of y natives with yoiir alowance we shall take care of: & so not to trouble 
with fartlier Inlargement we rest only desiring your due consideration & a return 
By our Louing ffriend John Lankton and subscribe our selfes your nedy petitioners 

Thomas Newell Daniell warner 

John Lankton Abraham Andrews 

John andrews Thomas hancox 

John warner seinio"' John Carrington 

Daniell porter Daniell Andrews, 

Edmun Scoot Joseph heacox 

John Standly Junior thomas standly 

abraham brounsen Obadiah richards* 

Richard seamer Timothy standley 

John Warner Junio' william higgeson 

Isack brounsen John porter 

Samuell heacox Thomas Barnes 

John Wellton John woodruff. 

Attention is requested to the apparent distinction made in this 
petition between the tract of land desired for a plantation and the 
place within it — the language it will be noted is, "having found out 
a trackt at sl place called by ye Indians Matitacoock." 

* In a different hand writing. 



124 HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 

THE ANSWER OF THE COURT TO THE PETITION FOR A PLANTATION. 

Oct. 9. 1673 
In answer to the petition of severall inhabitants of the towne of Farmington that 
Mattatock that those lands might be granted for a plantation, this Court have seen 
cause to order that those lands may be viewed sometime between this and the Court 
in IMay next, and that reporte be made to the Court in May next, whether it be 
judged fitt to make a plantation. The Committee appoynted are L"' Tho: Bull, 
Lnt Rob' Webster and Daniel Pratt. 

The same distinction is preserved in the response of the Court 
in the words: " that Mattatock that those lands might be granted." Dr. 
J. Hammpnd Trumbull in editing the published Records of the Col- 
ony notices this apparent vagary of language, and adds in a note, the 
words, " So in the Record." Nothing is more unsafe to historical 
accuracy than the easy assumption that the early writers were care • 
less or used language unadvisedly, when the fact may be and usu- 
ally is, that we fail to comprehend the intricacies of the situation, 
or are ignorant, or unmindful, of important factors in the case. 

Unfortunately for us, the early records of Waterbury have been, 
twice at least, harvested, with an abundant portion of excellent his- 
torical grain left in the field, but no gleaners passing that way to 
garner it. Events that were familiar to the men of that time, and 
for which there seemed to them to be no future use, were omitted 
in the new volumes of record, the old books being discarded and 
lost. It will be remembered that it was upon the ninth of October, 
1673, that the committee was appointed to view the lands in ques- 
tion, and that it was to make report concerning them at the May 
session of Court, 1674. It did so, and here is the report, as rendered: 

THE COMMITTEES RETURN ABOUT MATTATOCK. 

April 6. 7. S. 9. 1674. 
Wee, whos names are imderwritten (according to the desire and appointment of 
y honoured Court) have viewed y lands upon Mattatuck river in order to a planta- 
tion, we doe apprehend that there is about six hundred acres of meadow and plow- 
ing land lying on both sides of y" river besides upland convenient for a towne plot, 
with a suitable out let into y woods on y" west of y"' river, and good feeding land 
for cattell. 

The meadow & plowing land above written a considerable part of it lyeth in two 
peices near y^ town plot, y" rest in smaller parcels, y** farthest of which we judge 
not above fower miles from y*" towne plot: and our apprehensions are that it may 
accommodate thirty familyes 

Thomas Bull 
Nicho: Olmstead 
Robert Webster. 

[For some reason, not apparent, Nicholas Olmstead acted in the place of 
Daniell Pratt.] 

It will be seen that Thomas Bull, Nicholas Olmstead and Robert 
Webster, occupied four days in the investigation. They must there- 



CONNECTICUT'S PLANTATION AT MATTATUCK. 125 

fore have passed the nights of April 6th, 7th and 8th, 1674, in the 
wilderness, if it was all wilderness at that time, or possibly, like the 
earlier travelers between Connecticut and " The Bay," they lighted 
upon Indian wigwams by the way, and were hospitably entertained. 
Is it urged that there were no wigwams at Mattatuck ? We have the 
best of evidence that there was here one of the ^^ Long Wigwams" 
that were built for the use of the Indians when they assembled in 
large numbers for festive and other purposes. "The path that 
comes from the Long Wigwam," occurs more than once in our 
records. We suppose this wigwam to have been in the vicinity of 
Wigwam Swamp, "whose west end is at the north end of Burnt Hill," 
and from which a brook flows into Hancox Brook. This committee, 
in its report, proves itself to have done erticient work. In four days 
the men journeyed from Farmington to present Waterbury; crossed 
Mattatock River; selected the town site upon our present Town 
Plot; estimated the meadow and ploughing land, available for imme- 
diate use, at six hundred acres; examined the territory, we have 
reason to think, both up and down the river, as they give an opinion 
of the distance of the more remote meadows from the "town plot " 
of their selection as not above four miles ; reported good feeding- 
ground for cattle, and, finally, concluded their report with the oft- 
repeated and much-misunderstood " apprehension " concerning the 
ability of the region to support thirty families. 

Having lost from the records, in the case of Farmington, the 
formula for the formation of plantations, and their care bv 
committees during the period of their infancy, before they arrived 
at the stature of towns, with every one then committed to the 
care of its duly appointed King Constable, we are compelled 
to gather, here and there, what facts we may, regarding the 
conditions under which a plantation might be granted by the 
Court. We add here, what has perhaps been already intimated, 
that one of the requirements was, that as many as thirty fami- 
lies must be secured to form a plantation, for the reason that 
that number of house-holders was deemed sufficient to support a 
minister; therefore this return to the General Court of the ability 
of the region to support thirty families did not limit it, even in the 
opinion of the committee, to that number of inhabitants, but merely 
gave evidence that that requirement of the Court could be met in 
the case of Mattatuck. It was also added that there was a suitable 
outlet into the woods on the west of the river. The significance of 
the last sentence does not seem clear. It may have had reference to 
Mattatuck's access to Woodbury. Woodbury was then but an infant 
of eleven months, just that time having passed since four men and 
their associates had been granted permission " to errect a plantation 



126 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

at Pomperoage." Woodbury is somewhat apt to hold her head 
proudly with age above Waterbury, but her plantation grant is 
less than a year older than ours, although her English name and 
town estate bear earlier date. 

It was on Tuesday, the 19th of May, 1673, that the report con- 
cerning Mattatuck lands was received by the Court, considered, 
accepted, and acted upon by the appointment of " Major John Tall- 
cott, L"* Rob* Webster, L'" Nicho : Olmstead, Ens : Sam" vSteele and 
E^ns : John Wadsworth to be a committee to regulate and order the 
setleing of a plantation at Mattatock in the most suitable way that 
may be ; " and thus Mattatuck was duly committed to the martial 
nurses of its infancy — a major, two lieutenants, and two ensigns — 
and it still does credit to its early training. Of this committee, 
i\Iajor John Talcott was the most conspicuous member. From the 
time when he was " chosen ensign by the Trained Band of Hartford " 
in 1650, to the date of his death in 168S, John Talcott, Jr., led a busy, 
eventful and important life. The marvel is, that a man so weighted 
with colonial trusts of magnitude, shoiild have been chosen to lay 
the foundations of a plantation of minor importance. He never- 
theless attended to the commission valiantly and well. We have 
abundant proof of this, in the still existing documents relating to 
Mattatuck in his excellent legible handwriting. In the November 
following this appointment he was nominated and appointed " Com- 
mander-in-Chief " of all the military forces to be raised in the 
colony, and sent against New York. He already held the position 
of assistant to the Governor; was treasurer of the colony; commis- 
sioner of the United Colonies, and on the very next day after the 
Mattatuck appointment, he was on a committee to hear the "Indian 
Complaints " and draw them to an issue; two days after that, he was 
to go over to Long Island, empowered, with two others, "to order 
and settle the affairs of those people, establish military officers " and 
perform other trusts of magnitude; also, he was "to consider of and 
dispose of some tracts of land for the country " on still another com- 
mittee; and to " consult of some way to promote the public good " on 
another; beside being requested to look after the fencing of the 
meadows between Farmington and vSimsbury. Independent of all 
these matters, he was, it would seem, expected to obtain from the 
owners a deed of the territory of Mattatuck. His genius for coax- 
ing Indians was believed in. Just what tactics were used in the 
case of Waterbury we are not able to delineate, for records are 
silent, but we can, perhaps, obtain a dim outline from his own 
description of the manner in which he influenced the Indians of 
Simsbury to part with the lands that formed that township. 



CHAPTER IX. 

WATERBURY's first entrance upon plantation life THE " NEW 

TOWN GOEING UP AT MATTATUCK " IN 1675 — THE EFFECT UPON IT 

OF "king" Philip's war — the supposed flitting of the inhab- 
itants TO farmington — Connecticut's indian governor — 

progress of the war — SALE OF THE SURRENDERING INDIANS — 
major TALCOTT's INDIAN BOY — THE " IRISH CHARITY " OF 1680. 

THE Committee appointed by the General Assembly for the 
ordering of the settlement at Mattatuck, acted with com- 
mendable promptness. The company of and from Farm- 
ington knew that the land was virtually their own, and we are 
quite ready to believe that men did not wait for their allotments 
in severalty, in the spring time of 1674. Everything was just 
edging toward newness of life, a life made enjoyable by the tem- 
porary amiability of their Indian neighbors. That year's crops 
may have been already planted in the heaven-made meadows on the 
day when the committee announced that it had formulated the 
laws and the covenants under which Mattatuck might take its 
place as the twenty-sixth town within that portion of Connecticut 
colony that is now included in the bounds of the State.* This 
formula of obligations and agreements covers eight conditions. 

The first one permits every accepted inhabitant to hax e eight acres for a house 
lot. The second, bases the amount of land to be distributed in the meadows, upon 
the amount of each man's estate, and limits the value of that estate for this distri- 
bution, to one hundred pounds. The third, provides for the payment of public 
charges, for five years, by a tax upon the meadows. The fourth, requires every 
person who shall take up allotments within four years from the date of the 
"Articles" to build " a good, substantial dwelling house, at least eighteen feet 
long, sixteen wide, and nine feet between Joynts " with a good chimney. 

The fifth, requires the fourth article to be complied with in every particular, 
under penalty of loss of the allotments — buildings excepted — and the return of the 
allotments to the committee for future bestowment upon a more complying inhab- 
itant. The sixth, requires the possessor of an allotment — he having built his house — 
to take up his personal residence in it as an inhabitant within the four specified years. 
If a man failed to perform his duty in building and occupying, he was to forego not 
only his allotments, but his lands also. It is supposed that this failure operated to 
shut him out from any further rights in the township, notwithstanding any pur- 
chase money he had paid. The seventh requirement is, that a man, having built 
his house, must live in it four years before coming to the full ownership of it, or 

*At the time when Mattatuck became a plantation the eastern portion of Long Island was under the 
jurisdiction of Connecticut Colony. 



128 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



such possession as would enable him to sell the same and his lands in the township. 
The eighth condition required every person who received allotments from the 
committee to subscribe to the " Articles" by his name or mark. 

To this document thirty-nine names are appended. Thirty-one 
of the number are upon the face of it, eight upon the reverse. 
The thirty-one names were written by Major Talcott. The eig-ht 
















., <„., sr ''"■» ■•■■ -<;_'■( '/i'''>- ''"'^ ■*■ : / • s ■- 



'^T' 



V\:-ir'.n. i 















OTf ;t/,I^. 






*•,: 1+ iirl(,-».' ^i,,rv.l +„,.« ....,,., 



')• imptcttt/iri'rhi tn iiioff ill- tti'/'i(-i^ I'll it^it 



/f m <-fl»v'/A ■>•'.< rf f /^r/i crit^"'^'^- 






&. 



<f. 



ARTICLES OF AGREEMENT AND ASSOCI 



ATION ADOPTED BY THE PLANTERS ( 



I M.M TAILLK ; II RSI' PAGE. 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 



names are autographs. Upon a list of orders issued by the com- 
mittee in 1682, we find three additional names— also autographs 

thus making forty-two men in all who assumed the responsibili- 
ties of planters at Mattatuck from 1674 to 16S7. A fac simile of 
this paper is here given. 






f -i 
7~T , 



1 



f 
g^' 



/cur*-'" :'^rf''^'i' an) uriiti' ifi <,:„tt^ ^ii'U. tJi(vcS b^S-Wt/J'^ 









if, JO- f 00 
100 









_ 00 



'•';,-.-ir..^-'5« 



e^. 






., ;;„-.V '\''>'' ■'''''^' / "^ 

ha.-u<i 2t'JV«, r*"^ ' 



4^;a: ,/<:^ "5" 



«•<' 



S*-' 




ARTICLES OF AGREEMENT ; SECOND PAGE. 






r 



*••»■ 



.y 



.. /. 



':r^'. 












♦-"'•^y^ii Y^f 



4 








\sS 



X 



■'■j(?-^.. 



-w^:!^* 



,.--j 



i>--)« 



, . o HISTOR Y OF WA TERB UR Y. 

This paper was prepared by Major Talcott and delivered to the 
men of Mattatuck, and is a copy of the original manuscript with 
its autograph signatures, which was undoubtedly returned to the 
General Court. The illustrations show that it was written upon 






._J 



ARTICLES OF AGREEMENT ; REVERSE. 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 131 

three sheets of paper, which were afterward made one by sewing 
the parts together. At the fourth article the stitches are taken 
with a red worsted cord which has kept its color well for nearly 
two hundred and twenty years. At the sixth and seventh articles 
it is again sewed by brown linen thread. The document entire is 
a little less than a yard in length. It has been bound in glass and 
framed, and will be handed down to the care of coming genera- 
tions. The third page of the illustration shows the reverse. The 
writing upon it, except the signatures, is that of John Wadsworth. 

The document was found in 1890, together with other orders 
relating to the settlement. This discovery included two of the 
Indian deeds of the township; the original lay-out of the three 
acre lots, and a very valuable paper relating to the houses of 1681. 
They were in the house of Mr. Charles D. Kingsbury, on North 
Main street, in Waterbury. Soon after the decease of that gentle- 
man, his son. Honorable Frederick J. Kingsbury, sent this docu- 
ment to the writer, and the finding of it led to the examination of 
thousands of papers that were in the same house. The older 
papers had been handed down from one town clerk to another, 
until, in 1793, the inheritance fell upon John Kingsbury. He was 
then a young man of thirty-one years. During a life-time of 
official service, from town clerk to presiding judge of New Haven 
County Court, Judge Kingsbur}" had accumulated many valuable 
documents, all of which were placed in the hands of the writer, to 
the very great advantage of this work. When Dr. Henry Bronson 
prepared his history of the town he was without the valuable 
assistance thus acquired. A comparison of the original paper 
here represented with the version of it as rendered b}' the recorder 
of the period and faithfully reproduced by Dr. Bronson will result 
to the advantage of Major Talcott's paper. The recorder for 
Waterbury omitted the name of one signer, that of Benjamin 
Judd, thus making it appear that the signers of 1674 were thirty 
in number, instead of thirty-one. 

This paper is not only important in itself, but is noteworthy as 
the only one to which the autograph of every member of the com- 
mittee is attached, and also as the only one that has been found 
relating to Mattatuck during the first three years of its existence 
as a plantation. We are thus left without direct evidence of what 
was achieved in the year 1674, and that part of 1675 before the 
inhabitants were ordered away. We know from subsequent events 
and recorded references, that the beautiful ridge of high land that 
we still call Town Plot, was the chosen town site. It was selected 
by the committee to view the lands, and approved by the commit- 



132 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



tec to order the plantation. From the "Articles of Agreement," 
we naturally infer that eight-acre house lots were allotted to the 
subscribers, but even this ample provision may have been modi- 
fied in order to bring the habitations into more immediate neigh- 
borhood. These house lots we are told, were laid out on either 
side of a highway. That there was a highway extending north 
and south through the old Town Plot we know, and we know that 
its width as originally laid out was 264 feet. This we learn by a 
subsequent order for its reduction to two rods. This was after the 
town site had been chosen on the east side of the river, in 1677. 
It was after that time often called the "town spot," to distinguish 
it from the town plot. 

We are left with little knowledge of the achievements of our 
fathers during the period between June 6th, 1674, and the tenth 
month of the year 1677. Tradition points her finger to the hill on 
which the Waterbury Hospital stands, as the site of certain cellars 
which the men of Farmington digged in its eastward declivity for 
protection during their first winter here. It has long been believed 
that men spent that winter at or near the point where Sled Hall 
Brook flows into the river. The finding of Indian arrow-heads at 

this place suggests that wigwams 

"X may have been there also. Sled 

1 Hall Brook might tell us that it 

I ran a saw-mill that first winter, 

1 but its voice has departed with its 

j falling waters, and we listen in 

vain at the closed door of the 

past. 

Leaving tradition, we do not 
know how many of the thirty- 
one men presented themselves to 
accept house lots ; neither do 
we know how many habitations 
graced Town Plot in 1674 and 1675. 
Whatever was done at that time 
has been utterly lost to us ; but 
the finding of the orders of the 
committee for 1677 affords us a 
bit of material on which to specu- 
late in house lots. On the back of 
the order to reduce the dimen- 
sions of the highway on " Old Town Plott " is traced what appears 
to be the lay-out of the original town or village, and we may accept 



.C^««F^3'PE«»— 5^-5 










I'HE OLD TOWN I'LOT. 



MA TTA T UCK A 8 A PL A NT A TION. 1 3 3 

it with more or less uncertainty. It certainly is not the new town 
spot on the east side of the river. Fifty-two years later, when 
these old eight-acre house lots came in cjuestion and they were to 
be looked up and laid out anew, wc find "that it was by vote agreed 
that if the committee for the old Town Plot lots can not find all 
the old Town Plot lots for all the original proprietors, those that 
are wanting may have liberty to take them up in the undivided 
lands." If we rely upon the house lots, as plotted on the back of 
the order, we shall at once see that the whole number of sub- 
scribers does not appear to be represented. There is a highway, 
on one side of which nine lots of varying size are outlined, with 
eight on its opposite side. At either end of this highway are 
transverse ways, on one of which we find five lots, on the other 
three, making twenty -five in all; thus intimating that twenty- 
five of the original proprietors made some progress in building 
on the original town site, before the inhabitants were ordered 
away in 1675. 

One word or more may be allowed just here regarding the gen- 
eral condition of the colony at the time Mattatuck had its first 
beginning; for it seems to have had two distinct entrances upon 
plantation life, the first in 1674, the second in 1677. 

The year 1674 was a period exceptionally free from disturbance 
in colonial life in New England. The treaty of peace had been 
signed between England and the vStates General of the 
United Netherlands, by which New York had been restored to the 
English. Major Andros did not arrive in New York — to begin dis- 
turbances and claim jurisdiction, for the Duke of York, over all the 
region to the Connecticut River— until November in that year, and 
he waited until the May following to demand surrender of the ter- 
ritory. The growth of towns in the colony was extremely grati- 
fying. So quiet and peaceful, comparatively speaking, was the 
country that there seems to have been no occasion for the meeting 
of the authorities between May and October, and, when the last 
Wednesday in that month was appointed " to be kept as a day of 
publique Thanksgiving throughout the colony to prayse God for 
the continuance of His mercy and goodness to the English nation," 
thanks were to be given " for freedom from the dangers of war 
which did surround them, for the enjoyment of God's holy word 
and ordinances with peace, for health, which had been continued 
in the plantation, and for the comfortable harvest the Lord had 
been pleased to grant them." All the business before this court 
related to matters of peace. Time was found even for establish- 
ing a table of rates for post-riders and their expenses throughout 



HTSTOR Y OF WA lERB UR Y. 

the colony, with Hartford as the hub of the wheel. Under such 
circumstances can we suppose that the best blood in Farmington 
would remain idle in Waterbury? that no sounds of the builder 
were heard on Town Plot during the summer and autumn of (me 
year and the summer of another year ? 

That the town was in building, in May of 1675, appears from the 
action of the Court on the petition of Joseph Hawkins and John 
Hull, of " Pagawsett," that "Pawgasuck" (Derby), might be made 
a Plantation. In view of the facts as given by them to the General 
Court — "that about twelve families were settled there already, and 
more, to the number of eleven, were preparing for settlement 
forthwith; that the people had engaged a minister to settle 
amongst them speedily, and had expended about one hundred 
pounds in preparing a house for him " — the court was induced to 
look with favor upon the petition, reserving to itself the power to 
settle the bounds of the place "so as may be most accommodating 
and least inconvenient to the said Paw'gasuck and the new town 
goeing up at Afattatock." 

Early in the summer of 1675, began the Jirst war between Indi- 
ans and Englishmen, with "King Philip " of Rhode Island, who 
was said to be the son of Miantonomah, and the grandson of 
Massasoit, as the generally accredited aggressor. It was marked 
at every step by horrors and cruelties that can never be forgotten 
so long as the meaning of the word war is retained in the conscious- 
ness of an Englishman. Massachusetts is to this day monumented 
with memories of it. No pen needs to trace anew the story, from 
the day in June, when Philip, roused to anger by the execution of 
three of his friends by the English, because of their murder of an 
Indian Missionary, marched out from his fortress on Mount Hope, 
near Bristol, R. I., and fell upon the little company at "Swansey," 
in Plymouth Colony, down to the date of his death, in August, of 
the following year. On the first day of July the news reached 
Hartford of the attack upon Swansea. Measures were at once 
taken to send thirty dragoons and ten troopers to aid in the 
defence of vStonington and New London. The men were raised 
out of the three original towns, and Nicholas Olmstead was com- 
missioned as their lieutenant. They set forth at a day's notice. 
Word was hurried down the way to New Haven, and ordered to be 
sent on to all the towns lying on the sea coast, that "the Indians 
were up in arms in Plimouth and in the Narrogancett Country; 
that they had assaulted the English; slain about thirty; burnt 
some houses, and that they were engaging the Indians round about 
by sending locks of some English that they had slain, from one 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 135 

place to another." To add to the intricate situation, Governor 
Andros arrived with two sh:)ops at Saybrook. He was come 
ostensibly to make a visit, and to give aid, but everything in the 
way of usurpation was momentarily expected from him and his 
forces. The utmost of delicate and firm diplomacy was required. 
The council and the commander. Captain Thomas Bull, proved equal 
to the occasion, and after some expressive words and impressive 
ceremonies between the parties of both parts. Governor Andros 
made a formal departure without having forcibly carried out his 
supposed right, which was to take possession of the territory lying- 
west of the Connecticut River, for the Duke of York. 

That the Pequot Indians, west of the Mystic River, remained 
friendly to the English in this war, may have been largely owing 
to a fact that seems to have been lost sight of. Only two months 
before the contest began, the government of that tribe had been 
duly organized by Connecticut; a code of laws drawn up, under 
which they were recpured to live, and the government placed in 
the hands of an Indian governor with an associate and two Indian 
assistants. For the support of this government, largely instituted 
by our Major Talcott, whose laws are extremely interesting and 
suggestive, "each Indian man above sixteen years of age, was to 
contribute annually five shillings in current Indian pay." This 
revenue to the governing Indians, doubtless played an important 
part in keeping the peace. Governor Cassicinamon was wily 
enough to beg that the Indians, whom he was to govern, should 
not be informed of his own interest in the income, thus acquired. 

"About I in the morning of August fifth, 1675, the Council," 
consisting of Governor Winthrop, Major Talcott, Captain Allen 
and three other gentlemen, was called together. A messenger 
had arrived in Hartford with thrilling tidings. Less than forty 
miles away, at Quabaug, now Brookfield, one of the most stirring 
events of the war had taken place. The Indians, in pursuit of 
fleeing victims had entered the town — but we all know the story! 
We learned it in childhood. We almost know that house by sight 
— the large one on the hill — into which all the village folk are 
fled. We enter with them, and for two long days watch and wait, 
while all around us houses burn, until this one in which we crouch 
is the only one left in the town. We hear, are forced to hear, the 
piercing in of the musket balls that pelt the house, for the Indians 
have muskets now! We are made to feel the flash of fier}- brands 
hurled upon roof and clapboard, to catch the fumes of sulphur, as 
rags dipped in brimstone stifle the air they are tossed through. 
We dart back from the fire-tipped arrows that are shot against it. 



136 HISTORY OF WATERS UET. 

We are even compelled to watch with well nigh fatal fascination 
//la^ cart, while Indians lade it with flax and tow until it can hold 
no more; while they throw on the flaming torch and thrust for- 
ward the fiery load that strikes the house with a burning thud; to 
know, at last, that the house is kindling! Shall we stay to burn, or 
open that door and rush forth to meet three hundred foes, every 
one of whom has heard the story of the burning of his Indian 
fathers in swamp and fort by Englishmen ? While we hesitate, the 
"heavens are opened," the floods descend, the fire is quenched, 
help cometh, and we are saved! 

It was after Hadley, Deerfield and Northfield had been 
attacked ; after the seventy yoiing men from Essex county, con- 
veying grain from Deerfield to Hadley, had been surrounded and 
slain while gathering grapes at Muddy Brook, by an overwhelm- 
ing force of nearly eight hundred Indians; after thirty houses had 
been burned at Springfield, that advice " to be observed " came 
from the General Court. The inciting cause for this advice was a 
letter received from Governor Andros of New York. It was writ- 
ten October loth, and informed the Council that an Indian, profess- 
ing friendship for Englishmen, had given warning that the Con- 
necticut Indians planned to attack Hartford during the " light 
moon" of October. Governor Andros received this news in the 
morning and hurried it off by post. He added to it the report 
that other towns between Hartford and Greenwich were in the 
same danger, and that between five and six thousand Indians were 
" engaged together " to make the attacks. The urgency of this let- 
ter is well expressed by its inscription. After the usual address 
to Deputy Governor Leete, Governor Andros added, '■ to be forth- 
with posted up to the Court, post, haste, post— night and daye." 
This letter confirmed fears that were already in force because of 
the war-like demonstrations in Connecticut's own towns. The 
Indians of Milford made complaints of hard treatment, and even 
the Paugasuck Indians of Derby " were prepared with their arms 
in a hostile manner." This had so alarmed the inhabitants that 
the Council was appealed to for advice. The Court had already 
advised the inhabitants "to remove their women and children; 
their best goods and their corn— what they could of it— to some 
bigger town that had a better capacity to defend itself," and had 
given the same counsel to all small places and farms throughout 
the Colony. 

Upon the receipt of this letter advice crystallized into law. 
Under the impression of imminent danger, the Council set forth in 
crisp language the well nigh defenceless condition of all the plan- 



JA4 TTA T UCK AS A PL ANT A TION. 1 3 7 

tations, and ordered each one to make places of defence and 
appoint room in them for the women and children, and others not 
able to help themselves, to repair into in case of assault. It 
ordered all weak places and out-livers on farms speedily to remove, 
with the best of their estates, to places of the most hopeful 
security. This order was issued October 14, 1675. Treaties were 
at once formed with the Indians of Hartford, Farming-ton, 
Wethersfield, and Middletown. The Indians were to set their 
wig-wams where ordered, that they might be kept under the watch 
and ward of the respective towns. This was done to prevent their 
departure to join hostile tribes or to do injury to Englishmen, and 
also to prevent any cause of offence that might be oft'ered to them 
by white men. At Hartford, a list of every Indian man, woman 
and child was taken. When the night watch went on duty, each 
Indian answered to the roll-call. When the ward began in the day 
the list was handed over to the warders, and each made answer 
again to the name on the roll. No Indian could be abroad after 
night fall, neither could he be absent, except by ticket of leave, 
unless accompanied by an inhabitant. 

We naturally infer that it was at this time, and consequent 
upon the order recited, that the inhabitants of Mattatuck took the 
Council's warning. We know that the men of Woodbury returned 
to Stratford, their old home, and that it was with great difficulty 
that many of them were persuaded to return to the wilderness 
when the war was ended. A considerable number of the then 
planters of Mattatuck still held home lots and houses in Farming- 
ton. No written evidence of the fact has been found by the 
writer, but it seems almost necessarily true that the "new town 
going up at Mattatuck " ceased in its building; that its dwellers 
left their houses on our Town Plot, crossed the river near vSled 
Hall Brook, followed the raised roadway, still apparent, leading 
from that point across the meadows to Willow street, and thence 
took their way by "the Watterbury path " to Farmington. This 
discouragement must have fallen heavily upon the little band of 
workers, that doubtless was compelled to leave certain of its num- 
ber to gather in the Indian and English corn and convey it to the 
nearest place of safety. Wallingford was at the time the nearest 
place of safety, as there were garrison houses there. 

Other orders soon followed. vSimsbury was given but one week 
to remove in— Hartford, New Haven and other towns that could 
do so were enjoined to fortify. They were "to compleat and lyne 
their stockadoes and flanckers with a ditch and breast worke— that 
persons might have recourse to them to annoy and withstand ene- 



138 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

mies, and all men's courage more animated and emboldened to do 
their dutys." Milford gave the Council some concern. The peo- 
ple there differed in the matter of their fortifications. They had 
trouble also with their Indian neighbors, these not keeping within 
the bounds prescribed, " and the people of Milford wishing to deal 
with them as enemies." The Council, without a day's delay, posted 
off a letter to Mr. Alexander Bryan of that town, desiring him to 
cause "all the people to carry so tenderly towards the Indians that 
they may not receive any just provocation to stir them up against 
us," adding: "We have enemies enough, and let us not by any 
harsh dealing stir up more yet ! Let us walk wisely and warily, 
that God may be with us." 

The necessit}' for a standing army caused an order to be issued 
in May of 1676 for three hundred and fift}' men to be raised as the 
standing army of the colonies. How many men of the Mattatuck 
of 1674 and 1675, beside Timothy Standly and John Bronson, were 
volunteers in the companies that went forth to battle with the 
enemy, and were to have all the plunder that they could seize; 
"both of persons, corn or estate," the only condition being that 
"authority should have the first tender of their dispose of captives, 
allowing them the market price," or how many of their number 
were pressed into the more regular service has not been learned.* 
Farmington was largeh^ represented in this war, more than fifty 
men being demanded of her; and once, at least, she was warned, 
by post, to stand upon guard for her own defence. 

We learn, with interest, the effect that this war had upon one 
of the thirty-one men of Mattatuck in determining his future resi- 
dence. John Judd and John Hawkins were the sons respectivel}' 
of the Deacon Thomas Judd and the Anthony Hawkins who had 
grants of four hundred acres in 1661. John Judd had married Ruth 
Hawkins, a sister of John Hawkins, and the latter, when about to 
go forth with the army, made a will, from which I quote : 

THIS FOR MY BROTHER, JOHN JUDD. 

January the nth, 1676. 
These may inform you and those whom it may concern that if the providence of 
God sliall so order it that I fall on the field and loose my life, or miscarry any other 
way before I come home, that the small estate that God hath given me shall be 
disposed as is here mentioned. 

To his nephew, the four-year old child of John Judd and his 
sister Ruth, he gave his house and home-lot, together with other 

* At a meeting of the Council in Hartford, December 5th, 1676, there was granted to John Bronson of 
Farmington, the sum of five pounds "as reparation for his wounds and damage received thereby, and quar- 
teridg and halfe pay to the first of this present month." To Timothy Standly, there was granted a soldier's 
lot. There were three John Bronsons in Farmington. 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 139 

lands, when he should be twenty-one years of age. (In this will 
the child is called the "cousin " of the testator). During the inter- 
vening seventeen years, the benefits arising from house and lands 
were to be held by John Judd. That John Hawkins fell in battle, 
or soon died, is apparent from the date of the inventor}^ of his 
estate, which is September fifth, of the same year. Thus, we 
account in part — the removal of Deacon Thomas Judd to Hadley 
in 1679 being an additional motive — for the fact that John Judd 
never came to build on and occupy the house lot of two acres 
extending along the west side of Bank street, from the " Green," 
nearly to the Waterbury Bank, which was duly assigned to him. 

As we hasten on, this not being in any wise an outline of the 
war, we turn most willingly away from all the horrors of the win- 
try march of near two thousand Englishmen with their faithful 
Indian allies, and its outcome, in the greatest of all the swamp 
fort-fights, that of Narragansett, and come to the close of the 
conflict, making mere mention of the fact that throughout King 
Philip's war, the most careful, earnest and painstaking efforts 
were made, first and last, by the General Court, and the Council to 
"conciliate, pacificate, and well treat" the Indians within their 
borders. The safety of the colonists at home, depended on keep- 
ing their Indian neighbors "contented in their minds," and in gen- 
eral, success attended their efforts. When subject to the rigors of 
long marches, taken in cold and hunger, their Indian allies were, 
seemingly, if not in fact, treated with greater consideration than 
were the colonists themselves; so fearful were they of losing their 
dusky friends. The Court entreated her children in all the towns 
to come to some agreement with their neighbor Indians, by which 
they might be able to distinguish them from the enemy, and " not 
to put them iipon any unrighteous and intolerable terms, to be 
observed, least trouble break out to the country thereby." Connec- 
ticut colony lost few of its inhabitants within her own bounds. A 
man named Kirby was killed, between Middletown and Wethers- 
field, by five Indians. Near Windsor, G. Elmore was slain. Henry 
Denslow, William Hill, and perhaps others, fell victims to Indian 
warfare. When Cohause, an Indian, who was taken prisoner by 
Indians, between Milford and New Haven, was examined before 
the Council, at Hartford, he admitted his knowledge of and parti- 
cipation in most of the above murders. As " a child of death, the 
council sentenced him to suffer the pains and terrors of death." 
His executioner was an Indian. 

Although it has been intimated that this war ended with the 
death of King Philip, it kept its active life long past that event,. 



i^o HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Hatfield and Deerfield receiving "visits from fug-itive Indians in 
vSeptember of 1677. They burned, it is said, seven houses, took 
captive twenty-four inhabitants, and killed, at Hatfield, several 
persons. This news aroused once more the people of Connecticut. 
Post-riders were sent forth: towns were warned to put themselves 
in defensive order; Hartford County was ordered to bake one 
thousand pounds of bread; the other counties five hundred each, 
and hold it in readiness for instant use, and fifty men from the 
triplet-towns on the river were rushed forth to Hatfield, with 
horses, long arms and ammunition. During this war, horses were 
comparatively few in number, and the prices at which they were 
held were very high. On the long marches the proportion of horses 
to men was about one to three. 

This seems to have been the last requisition of troops that was 
made. Gradually the conflict softened, the Indians either fled to 
the northward, or surrendered. The surrendering Indians, if not 
proved luurderers, were to " have their lives " and were "not to be 
sold out of the country for slaves," but all persons sixteen years of 
age or older were to be sold for servitude. If under sixteen, the 
time of such servitude was to extend until the subject of it 
reached the age of twenty-six years. If over sixteen, the time 
was ten years. There was a division of Indians made to each 
coiinty, and the " committee men " were to divide the county pro- 
portion, to the several towns in that county. When so divided, 
the Indians were offered for sale in each town unto " such as they 
thought most meet to educate and well nurture them, at such 
price as was thought equal." Each assistant and each " committee 
man was to have one for himself freely." The prisoners of war 
were otherwise disposed of. Some of the number belonged to the 
captors; others were bestowed upon "friend Indians;" and, perhaps 
the more dangerous sort, were sent out of the country and sold into 
slavery. Could a greater hardship befall an American Indian — 
with all the free-born blood of the forest ranger running from 
heart to brain — than to be inade a slave in an English town, even 
when his master was just and kind ? Our Major Talcott had one of 
these Indian boys, whom, according to his account book, now 
in the State Library at Hartford, he bought of Mr. Wolcott. The 
Major kept a little account in his " waste book " of the running 
away of this Indian boy, that well illustrates the tendency of the 
Indian to roam at will, and we give it. 

January 1680, Dick was gone away three days. 

July 30, 1681, Dick ran away at the time of Indian Dance, three days in Harness 
expended to find him. 

August 20, ran away two days. 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 141 

August 25, Dick ran away and was found next day by his father, being but one 
day, found at Mr. Lord's barn. 

August 27, Dick ran away and was gone six days. 

September 13, Dick ran away witli his father, as they say, went up to the West 
Mountain, and came not until September 19th, six days in all. Cost me one way 
and another to send out after them five shillings. 

November 4th, Dick ran way four days. 

November 15th and 16, Dick ran away all three days, and was off and on in the 
neck of land where was a Town of Indians, and his father brought him, after much 
time spent. That time, I was at charges in looking after him, four shillings. 

October 24th, 16S4, Dick went way to Simsbury to Seposs his wigwam. The 
English saw him and advised Sepos to bring him home, but I sent two men tO' 
search after him and they brought him home and Sepos came with them. He was 
gone that time six days and spoyled his cloathes very much that time. The charges- 
in looking after him was nine shillings that I was out of purse. 

May 19, 1685, Dick went away again. I sent to Podunk then, as I always did,, 
and to Farmington, Weathersfield and Simsbury as my manner was always to send 
around, that if I got out of one town, he would be taken in the other towns, but 
Coakham seized him on the East side of the Great River and brought him home. 
I expended in my search for him that time, three shillings and six pence and he 
was gone bout five days. 

But the crowning aggravation came in 1687, when, "Dick ran 
away in hay time ! I sent a man to Farmington on piirpose with 
letters to Mr. Wadsworth to enquire of the Indians, and to Sims- 
bury, to Weathersfield, and over the Great River, and at last Mr. 
Hooker's Indian boys brought him home, who was gone that time 
five days and the charges this time was six shillings." This run- 
ning account of Dick's running away was kept with a legal pur- 
pose. It could be brought iip against him at the end of his ten 
years of service and would prevent his release from servitude. A 
glance at Dick's "wast" book for the other side of his account, 
though earnestly desired, is denied to us. It should be told here 
that Major Talcott had the power to sell Dick, as a captive, to be 
transported out of the country for his running away, and also 
that each Indian who returned Dick received two yards of cloth. 

We have made no attempt to give even an outline of King- 
Philip's war. Connecticut disclaimed all responsibility for it, but 
she suffered from it in untold ways. We have been able to catch 
a glimpse of the cost of it to Waterbury. It seems to have cost us 
the loss of a number of original planters; to have thrown a cloud 
of discouragement over the enterprise that was many years in lift- 
ing; to have added greatly to the burdens of those who had 
the moral and physical courage to continue the work— begun 
so auspiciously and interrupted at the vital point; and finally, to 
have thrown our town so out of line with progress at its very 
beginning, and dwarfed it so completely that it was thrown back 



142 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



for several generations to rely solely upon self-effort under most 
discouraging conditions. Waterbury's position to-day among towns 
is that of a "self-made " town. Let us think thoughtfully of these 
things in her history; let us give credit where credit is clue; for 
the natural advantages of the township were less than those of 
any one of the towns settled at an early date. 

Mattatuck bore her early trials and troubles without an apparent 
luoan. Not a w^ord has been found in relation to the sufferings of 
her people during King Philip's war. Not a cry for aid has been 
heard. Not a petition for redress has been seen. It is only by 
looking up facts that tell of the troubles of surrounding towns that 
we can throw the light from their beacon fires of distress into our 
plantation. Is it probable that Mattatuck escaped the experiences 
that befell Woodbury and Derby ? 

There is at Hartford a petition, which has never been published, 
that w'as sent up in relation to the grievances of Woodbury and 
Derby. It was not seen until after the chapter relating to that war 
Avas in print. It was addressed to the General Court, October 12, 
1676, in behalf of those towns, by their respective ministers, Rever- 
end Zachariah Walker and Reverend John Bower. The writer of 
the petition was Mr. Bower. A portion of it only is here given : 

" That whereas the providence of God hath so ordered that by 
meanes of late troubles brought upon the country; we the inhab- 
itants of Woodbury and Derby have been necessitated to remove 
from our chvellings, and a more favorable aspect of Providence 
at the present inviting us to a return, and the necessity of many 
of our families in part enforcing it; yet forasmuch as we can not 
be assured but the like danger may again arise; we make bold 
before such our return to request this honored Court to resolve us 
in our important inquiry, viz.: in case the war with the Indians 
should be again renewed; w^hat w^e may expect and trust to from 
the authority of this realm in order to our protection and safety ? 
We humbly recpiest that this our inquiry may neither be judged 
offensive nor concluded irrational till the following grounds of it 
be considered. 

" First, we cannot be insensible of our former experience viz., that 
in a time when clanger threatened the loudest and our two planta- 
tions above s'd wxre in greatest hazard, we were not only without 
any other help but our own for the guarding of our said places, but 
our own [men] also, which were indeed too few, were taken from us 
time after time, being pressed from the sea side towns, w^hen occa- 
sionally they came thither about necessary business, w^hereby w'e 
had more, proportionable to our numbers, from our two plantations. 



3rATTATrCK Ao A PLANTATION. 



143 



imployed in the publick service than (we suppose) any other town 
of the colony : And as by that means we were forced to a removall 
so yt we had not the least benefit of any guard for the safety of our 
own persons or goods. Neither can we be insensible how unable many 
persons will be, after a second remove to those plantations, without 
mine to their families to return again to these their plantations; 
partly by meanes of the chargeableness of such removes, and partly 
by meanes of what disappointments we have already mict with." 

The letter or petition then defines the mutual obligations of sub 
jects and rulers, and sets forth the benefits that would accrue to 
New Haven and Fairfield counties by securing the plantations of 
Woodbury and Derby, and adds, "because the Indians would not 
set upon lower plantations until they had atteihpted those above, 
and if they fail there, they will be the more shy of pounding them- 
selves by coming lower." 

It may not be generally known that during the period just 
referred to — in 1676— Ireland, touched by the story of the siiffer- 
ings of her English brethren in New England, sent a gift of one 
thousand pounds for their relief. It is called in the records the 
"Irish Charity." Massachusetts caused a list to be made of the 
suffering families within her own borders and sent for correspond- 
ing lists from Plymouth and Connecticut. A list from Connecti- 
cut was forwarded, but when it became known that Massachusetts 
alone — with twelve towns yet to hear from — had within her bor- 
ders six hundred and sixty families that were in absohite distress, 
Connecticut, like the brave little Colony that she has ever been, 
remitted all her right, title and interest in the "Irish Charity" to 
Plymouth and Massachusetts colonies. Connecticut's list, if in 
existence, could give to us the names of families that were driven 
out of their habitations; the owners of houses that were burned, 
and also the names of those persons and families that were sus- 
tained bv charitv; for they were all included in it. 



CHAPTER X. 

MATTATUCK's second entrance upon plantation life A NEW TOWN 

SITE CHOSEN TRANSFER OF TITLE TO THE PLANTERS — -MAJOR 

TALCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF HIS PURCHASE OF A TOWNSHIP FROM THE 

INDIANS A GLANCE AT CONNECTICUT COLONY IN THE YEAR 

1679. 

THE Committee appointed to establish the plantation, without 
doubt, made due return to the Court of its acts concerning" 
our town, but no record of such accounting has been found; 
whereas, in the case of Derby an ample and minute return was ren- 
dered, even to the care that had been taken in providing a place for 
yards, where goods and cattle brought to the ferry from Woodbury 
and Mattatuck might be stored. This was accomplished in 1676. 

Mattatuck's second entrance upon plantation life is heralded to 
us by the announcement of a meeting, held by the proprietors in 
May, 1677. They 'assembled to discuss the question that had arisen 
concerning the town site. '' DifiEiculty " was recognized in setting the 
town where it was then laid out. No hint is given concerning the 
nature of this "difficulty." Dr. Bronson has suggested that it may 
have arisen from the desire to be on the same side of the river with 
their Farmington friends, in case of an attack from the Indians; 
from the difficulty of access from the east, both for themselves and 
their harvests, and from the fact that to Farmington they must 
resort "for the regular ministrations and ordinances of the Gospel." 
All these things must have received due consideration when the 
original site was chosen, and the conditions seem not to have 
changed, except that the danger from Indian raids had increased; 
but even then, Woodbury was nearer to them on the west and Derby 
on the south than Farmington was on the north. It would seem that 
some weightier cause than all these causes combined had arisen to 
throw discouragement over the Town Plot enterprise, and very natu- 
rally the men who had been foremost in building and in making- 
improvements on the hill would be the strong objectors to the change. 
Evidently the proprietors were not of one mind, for they left the mat- 
ter in the hands of a committee, and chose men of discretion and 
years to decide for them. These men were " Deacon Judd, John Langh- 
ton, Ser., John Andrus, wSenr, Goodman Root, and John Judd and Dan- 
iell Porter." They were to view and consider whether it would "not 
be more for the benefit of the proprietors in general to set the town 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 



145 



on the east side of the river." They were, in so doing, to content 
themselves with "less home lots." Those formerly laid out were 
to be secured to them. The committee was instructed in the follow 
ing" words, which it may be noticed differ slightly from the render- 
ing heretofore given : " provided also they think and concede it so 
to be, to advise with the Grand Committee, and in conjunction with 
them, they giving liberty, so to do." Under this agreement, the 
proprietors promised to act according to the decision of the com- 
mittee, "notwithstanding w^hat is already done." 

If we could cast the shadow of a coming event in the right 
direction we might throw legal light on the change of site, for 
at the session of the General Court next following, it was ordered 
that "for the future, all plantations or townships that shall or 
may settle in plantation-wise shall settle themselves in such near- 
ness together that they may be a help, defence and succour each 
to other against any surprize, onset or attempt of any comon 
enemie ; and the General Court from time to time shall appoynt 
some committee to regulate such plantation settlement accord- 
ingly." This enactment was made because of the "woefull experi- 
ence of the late war," and because the " Providence of God seemed 
to testify against a scattered way of living, as contrary to religion." 
Each family upon an eight-acre lot would necessarily be more 
remote from neighbors than the same family upon a two-acre 
lot. The removal to a plot one fourth the size of the first lay- 
out of the town made the settlement very compact, and far more 
capable of self-defence. It may also be suggested that, as more 
than once in our history, Mad River has played an important 
part, it also became a factor in this change. The corn mill was 
of the foremost importance, and the urgent need that it should 
be near by the house lots was recognized. The excellent natural 
advantages which Mad River, at that time called Roaring River, 
possessed as a mill-site could not have been overlooked, for we 
very soon find it with its name changed to Mill River, and a mill 
upon it. Our authority for its first name is the paper on which is 
the original lay-out of the three-acre lots. Three of the lots were 
laid out on Roaring River, two on the south side of it, and one on 
its east side. 

The question of immediate water supply determined the site of 
all or nearly all early homesteads. We find that through the acres, 
about seventy-five in number, that comprised the second town plot, 
four streams coursed their way. Great Brook and Little Brook 
passed through the house lots that lined the east side of Bank and 
North Main streets. The West Main street habitations were sup- 



J ^5 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

plied by the considerable rivulet that came down from the north- 
ern hio-hlands east of present Central avenue, and by another 
stream "that came from the westward. Both streams crossed West 
Main street near the site of St. John's Church, uniting- on its south- 
ern side. From that point the brook flowed westward through sev- 
eral house lots on its way, by meadow and cove, to the Great River.* 
The chosen spot was sufficiently well watered to supply to the 
town even its name " Watterbury." 

The next ray of light concerning the settlement falls upon it 
four months later through an Indian deed. The Assembly's Com- 
mittee transfers the title— Major Talcott alone signing the deed- 
to a tract of land ten miles in length from north to south, and six 
in breadth, to " Thomas Judd, John vStanley, Samuel Hikcox and 
Abraham Bronson, inhabitants of Mattatuck." As it names the 
above men and refers to the remainder of the company in the 
words, " and to the rest of the inhabitants belonging to the said Mat- 
tatuck," a fair inference is that in September, 1677, the four men 
named were already housed in the new plantation. Concerning 
this deed, we learn that the proprietors of Mattatuck paid the com- 
mittee thirty-eight pounds, "in hand received, or security suffi- 
ciently given for payment thereof." The Indian side of this sale 
does not appear in manuscript, but we get light on the possible 
means used in the purchase of Mattatuck lands from the following 
items, found in the account book of Major Talcott, which relate to 
his purchase of the township of Simsbury. It is probable that 
similar tact and wiles, and Trucking cloath Coats, meat, bread, 
beer and cider, Indian corn, and a shilling in money, played 
their part in the acquiring of our township — Major Talcott being 
the purchaser of both townships. The account is in his hand 
writing. 

16S2. 

May 15 : Simsberry Town is D'' Pr my payment of their indian parchas of their 
Bounds of their Town. 

To pay'd Totoo: and Nesahegon each of them a Trucking £. s. d. 
cloath Coat to Joshep whiting to John moses . . . 00 06 00 

To Seokets wife a Coat, Aups a Farmington indian a Coat, 
Nenepaush Squa one: Coate, Nesaheages Squa one Coate, 
Cherry one Coate, and mamantoes squa one Coat for these 
six Coats I charge 04 16 00 



*'rhe name of our larger river was, while Waterbury remained a plantation, Mattatuck River. After 
that date, the inhabitants called it the Great River, when necessary to designate it. This soon became in 
the lay out of lands and in deeds simply "the river." Occasionally, in a document relating to matters 
extending beyond the limits of the township, it became Waterbury River. The name Naugatuck for our 
section of the nver is quite modern. It was not universally adopted until after 1800. 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 



147 



May 1 8th To payd Nesahegan for his right in tantuuquafooge Six bush- 
ells of Indian Corne 

To him payd for his right in weatooge Nine bushells of indian 
Corn att this time indian corn fetch ready monev 2: shillings 
for which I expect money — • . . . . . . . i 17 06 

May iSth To payd Masecup 2: Bushells by the Indians order, to Cogri- 
uoset 2: bushells — pr the same order, to wayump pr ye 
same order one Bushell ....... 

May 18th To Seoketts squa 2 bushells, to nenepaush squa 2: bushells, To 
Aups 2: Bushells To pashoners squa 2: Bushells To totoos 
bushells seaven. To one bushell the Indians wear paj-d more — 
all as good as money soe I sould and others that sould, this 
being 21: Bushells . . . . . . . . 02 12 06 

Pd chery more in money one shilling .... 

pd to momantooes sqa four bushells of indian Corne . . 00 1 1 03 

pd to M'' Joseph whiting of the Country for a Coat Serg' John 

Griffin had for an indian that he payd for the purchass* . 00 iS 00 

pd p. charges of Twenty Indians first day at proudingf terms 
of a bargaine set the pot with good meat and bread beer 
and sider provided that day for Capt: Allyn and Capt: New- 
bery yo'' comittee 01 05 00 

Spent sundry times besides for 2 years together sometimes 10: 
sometime 20 sometimes 15 sometimes 6 or 7 indian with Cider 
victuall's and beer, at lest 16 days compleat myself and the 
first time cost me six dayes most of which I rod to pook hill 
[Podunk?] to the Indians to drive on the bargaine they 
demanding one 100 pounds was afraid any of C English 
should put me by the businis by adviseing them to insist 
upon that great sume for which I reckon . . . . 06 10 00 



1684 May, To so much payd Mr. Joseph Whiting for a Coat yo- Towns 
man had see folo 82 ...... . 



iS 16 03 



19 16 03 
Simsbury Towne is pr: contra: Credited. The Towne of Simsbury have granted 
to me three hundred Acres of Land on the West side of the Town upon the River 
that runs there where the Indians ust to ketch samon at a place called cherrys land 
and any where within theire Bounds by that sayd River to be taken up in one Two 
or Three places as I see cause, as by Town grant doth fully appear, a coppy 
whereof I have in keeping and this to be in full sattisfaction of all my cost and 
charge of the purchase of their bounds of Ten mile squar, and therefore must be 
accounted in my books at eighteen poundes sixteen shillings and three pence 

18 16 03 
More on the other side 01 00 00 

19 16 03 
The following is from the " History of Simsbury:" J " The Indians 

not having- been paid [for their lands] made a grevious complaint 



♦John Griffin had obtained from an Indian a deed of a portion of the Simsbury land, before this pur- 
chase. + So in the manuscript. :{: Noah A. Phelps, author of History of Simsbury. 



148 BISTORT OF WATERS URY. 

to the Major, and being- incessantly urging- for their dues," the town, 
" to still their acclamations and to bring to issue the said case, and 
to ease the Major of those vexatious outcries made by the Indians 
for their money," ordered the sale of one hundred and fifty acres 
of land to extinguish the debt. 

We will glance for a moment beyond the hills of this plantation 
gathering- at Mattatuck, in the year 1679, and look out upon the 
English Colony that encompasses it. We find Connecticut lying 
between "Narraganset River" on the east, and " Mamaronock 
Rivulet " on the west. Within her borders are twent3'-six towns — 
Mattatuck apparently not included in the number; for although 
Mattatuck seems to have been the twenty-sixth plantation, her 
town number was twenty-seven — another plantation having gained 
precedence in the race for town honors. In every settlement in the 
Colony except two, that are "newly begun," there is a "settled min- 
ister," and the two "are seeking out for ministers to settle amongst 
them." The highest salary paid is one hundred pounds; the lowest 
is estimated at not less than fifty. We find, with a little surprise, 
that already in the twenty-six towns the people are divided into 
" strict Congregational men, more large Congregational men, and 
moderate Presbyterians," while within the Colony there are " four 
or five Seven-day men, and four or five Quakers." Ministers are 
preaching to the people twice every Sabbath day and sometimes on 
Lecture days. Masters of families are catechizing their children 
and servants with regularity, being so required to do by law. The 
poor are relieved by the towns where they live, every town provid- 
ing for its own poor and impotent persons. There are seldom any 
that need relief, because labor is dear. Two shillings and some- 
times two shillings and sixpence for a day laborer is paid and 
provisions are cheap. Wheat is four shillings a bushel; beef two 
and a half pence a pound, and butter six pence; other provision in 
proportion. "Beggars and vagabond persons are not sufi:ered. 
When discovered, they are bound out to service." 

In the twenty-six towns are living 2,552 trained soldiers, for 
every man, with a few exceptions, between the ages of sixteen and 
sixty, is in his country's service. There is one "Troope" of about 
sixty horses. The Governor of the colony is the General of all the 
forces. There is a major in each one of the four counties, who 
commands the militia of that county. The horsemen are armed 
with pistols and carbines; the foot-soldiers with muskets and pike. 
There is one small fort at the mouth of Connecticut River. The 
Indians left alive in the colony, are estimated at five hundred 
fighting men. 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 149 

Thus carl}', it is with authority declared that most of the land 
that "is fit for planting is taken up," that what remains "must be 
subdued and gained out of the fire as it were, by hard blows and 
for small recompence." The principal trade of the colony is man- 
aged in the four towns of Hartford, on the Connecticut River. 
New London on the Pequot River and New Haven and Fairfield by 
the sea-side. The buildings are described as " generally of wood, 
some of stone and brick; many of them of good strength and come- 
liness for a wilderness, many forty foot long and twenty broad and 
some larger, three and four stories high." 

The commodities of the country, the larger part of which are 
transported to Boston and bartered for clothing, are wheat, pease, 
rye, barley, Indian corn, pork, beef, wool, hemp, flax, cider, perry 
(pear cider) tar, deal boards, pipe staves, and horses. There is also 
a trade carried on with Barbadoes, Jamaica and other islands, for 
money, rum, cotton wool, and sugar; with an occasional vessel 
laden with staves, pease, pork and " flower " to Madeira and Fayal. 
There are in the colony about twenty merchants ; some trade to 
Boston only, others to Boston and the Indies; others to Boston and 
New York; others include Newfoundland in their ventures. The 
vessels that are owned in the colony are four ships; one owned in 
Middletown, one in Hartford, and two in New London. One of the 
New London ships and the Hartford ship are of ninety tons 
burden each. To these may be added three pinks, twelve sloops, 
six ketches and two barks ; the total tonnage being about seven 
hundred. Absolute free trade is in full operation, except that a 
duty is collected on wine and liquors, which is improved toward the 
maintenance of free schools. Dwelling houses in the colony are 
not taxed, because they are so chargeable to maintain. The total 
valuation of the estates, dwelling houses not included, in the year 
1679 is ^153,614. This picture is not drawn with a free hand. It 
betrays at every step an evident desire not to paint the facts in glow- 
ing colours lest England exact more tribute for her King than the 
colonists are willing to yield; for these items have been gleaned 
from the replies made by authority of the General Assembly to 
certain questions concerning " His Majesties Corporation of Con- 
necticut." The questions were sent to New England by the 
"Committee for Trade and Foreign Plantations," in England. 



CHAPTER XI. 

THE FIRST MEETING OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE, IN JANU- 
ARY, 1677 THE SECOND MEETING IN 1678 THE THIRD MEETING 

IN NOVEMBER, 1679 THE FOURTH MEETING IN 1680 THE FIFTH 

MEETING IN 1680. 

HOW many meetings were held by the Assembly's Committee 
for Mattatuck in the interests of that plantation, cannot be 
told with accuracy. We have, well-preserved, in the hand- 
writing of Major Talcott, the orders of six meetings. They extend 
over a period of five years, from 1677 to 1682. By following their 
order we shall learn something of the growth of Mattatuck. 

New Year Day in England was March twenty-fifth until the date 
was changed to the first of January, by act of Parliament, in the 
year 1752. England's colonies obeyed the law implicitly, so long as 
required to do so. Attention is called to this point, for the reason 
that the writer has followed the usage of the period throughout its 
extent, thereby avoiding any confusion of dates, or unnecessary 
reference to "Old Style and "New Style." 

THE ORDERS OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE THE FIRST MEETING. 

In January, 1677, a meeting was held, probably in Farmington, 
by the committee for Mattatuck, at which six points were " agreed 
and concluded." The first one accepts John Root, senior, he sub 
scribing to the "Articles for settling of Mattatuck in behalf of one 
of his sons." The autograph of John Root, as a subscriber to the 
"Articles," has not been found. The name is found placed upon a 
fence division at a later day. It was before this date that Abraham 
Bronson* withdrew from Mattatuck and went to Lyme; that Rich- 
ard "Seemor," Thomas Gridley, and John Porter dropped out of the 
race — John " Scovel," Benjamin Barnes, Joseph Gaylord and David 
Carpenter coming in at this meeting to take their places. It was at 
this meeting that the highways were to be " mended .sufficiently " — 
Benjamin Judd being appointed to call the proprietors out each in 



*As early as October of 1G7", Abraham Bronson had taken up his residence in Lyme. Bronson and Joseph 
Peck were candidates for the office of Lieutenant. "The remonstrants " against Bronson's confirmation 
declared themselves " possessed with many fears what will become of our sweet and pretious peace which 
the Most High, praysed be his name, hath favoured us with." This election appears to have been made with 
all due formality. That it might be carried on in a solemn way, there was at least "a fortnight's warning 
given before the choice," and a sermon preached by Rev. Mr. Noyes. Abraham Bronson was elected Lieu- 
tenant, Joseph Peck, Ensign — Lieutenant Bronson was also a deputy from Lyme, to the General Assembly, 
for a number of vears. 



ORDERS OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE. jri 

his turn, to do his just part, and Benjamin— Mattatuck's resident 
surveyor— was warned by the committee "to attend the Country 
Law " in this service. With great consideration the committee 
granted to the proprietors one year more in which to take up resi- 
dence, each in his own house, in Mattatuck. The time that was 
formerly granted was soon to expire— on May 30, 1678. This exten- 
sion of time was to May 30, 1679. The final order related to public 
charges. They were to be borne "one year longer or more " than 
had been ordered in the third article, dated May 30, 1677. Major 
Talcott perhaps intended to write May 30, 1674 — the date of the 
original articles — the third one of which does relate to public 
charges — or it may have been that there was an annual meetino- 
on May 30, 1677, and that the orders were given on that day which 
would give us knowledge of the layout of the first highways, house 
lots, meadow allotments, garden -spots of an acre and less in 
Munhan Neck, and other events of interest that we can not learn 
the time and manner of. It is evident that there was a meeting- 
prior to the one whose orders we are following. 

It was in January, 1677 also, that the committee took occasion to 
announce that during the time it continued in power, it should 
appoint men " to lay out all necessary highways for the use of the 
inhabitants that were needful" and afterward the " Town was to 
state and lay them out, together with what common passages 
should be judged necessary." Then it was that the broad highway 
on the old Town Plot was reduced to two rods, and that the common 
field fence on the " East side of the river, for securing the meadows, 
was ordered to be made sufficiently by the last of May." Does the 
cjuestion arise ; How do we know that the above order is not the 
beginning of orders concerning the common-fence and field ? The 
answer is furnished in the list of names, whose owners were 
appointed to make the portion of the fence that was first allotted 
to them. It was appointed unto them to make it, at a time when 
Abraham Bronson, Richard Seamor, Thomas Gridley and John 
Porter were members of the plantation, and, as we have seen, they 
had left it before this meeting was held. Furthermore, on its roll, 
there is not the name of a man who joined the organization at this 
time ; showing conclusively that the common field and its fence 
had been the subject of an earlier order. During the year 1678 the 
settlement lapses into silence. Not a note of life can we extract 
from it, or find in relation to it, until March in that year. 

THE SECOND MEETING. 

Three men of the committee met "according to joint agree- 
ment" at Farmington, March 11, 1678, and determined that those 



^52 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY 



lots not 5'et laid out to the proprietors sliould be laid out by 
" Lieutenant vStandly [of Farmington] with the helpfulness of 
William Judd, and John Standly Jr." It speaks well for this 
committee of father and son that John Standly Junior's allot- 
ments were such that Talcott and Company afterward advised the 
town to make amends to him because of the "meanness" of them. 
In this second spring of the new beginning on the east side of the 
river, in 1678, there was " a mile of fence or thereabouts," ordered 
to be made within fifty days, and the three acre lots, which had 
been granted to the proprietors by a former grant, were to be laid 
out. William Judd, having had a grant that his three -acre lot 
should be "layd out upon the west end of his House Lott," the 
grant was confirmed. The three acres still lie to the southwest- 
ward of the house lot on which the late "Johnson house" stood, on 
North Willow street. 

THE 'IHIRD MEETINC. 

By the twenty-sixth of November, 1679, as winter was close at 
hand, the few courageous souls who had complied with the condi- 
tions, and adventured themselves and their families in the enter- 
prise, had appealed to the committee. These men doubtless felt that 
they were entitled to the presence and protection of every man who 
had signed the agreement to help build the town. Many of the pro- 
prietors still lingered in their old homes. Each man had some 
reason, sufficient unto himself, for his course of action, but his 
neighbor, in the lonely plantation on Great and Little Brooks, failed 
to see why the obligation should not be met. The committee con- 
vened at Farmington and held a meeting that continued two days. 
During this time it considered the case of the delinquent sub- 
scribers, and declaring that their delay led to the discouragement 
of the men already at Mattatuck, and weakened their hands, "deter- 
mined and resolved " to bring about a better state of things. To 
that end, the announcement was made that every man who was not 
personally present with his family at Mattatuck by the last of May, 
1680, there to abide, must forfeit his title and interest in all the allot- 
ments that had been granted to him there. This meant his house 
lot; his old Town Plot house lot; his three-acre lot, and such other 
grants as the committee had made every man equal in, without regard 
to the number of pounds annexed to his name. To add to the force of 
the argument for speedy removal, it was seemingly declared that 
mere personal presence, although it niig/it hold allotments, was not 
sufficient to hold title as 2^ proprietor in the undivided lauds of the township 
itself. To secure his hold upon them and place it upon a foundation 
never to be moved, he was required to build a mansion house in all 



ORDERS OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE. 153 

respects up to the specifications given on the last of May, 1674, and 
to have it finished the thirtieth day of May, 1681, and to be abiding 
in it on that date. The committee had been very considerate. In 
the first place, the time limited was from May, 1674, to May, 1678. 
Because of the intervening war, this time was extended to May, 
1679. When that time expired, an additional term, it is thought, 
must have been granted, but we find no extension covering the 
interval to November, 1679. Then, apparently, consideration, ex- 
tension and grace being alike failures, the penalty was annexed. 
We shall soon be able to see the result of this new law with its 
forfeitures. 

On the other side of the paper on which the above order is writ- 
ten, we find that Major Talcott has traced the annoimcement of the 
second death, so far as we have learned, that took place in the little 
band of thirty-one men, that of Daniel Warner. The language of 
the original record in the words that, "he, with his family, were 
upon the remove to Mattatuck, and on that juncture of time, the 
Divine providence of God removed the sayd Daniel out of the Land 
of the Living," suggests the possibility that his death was caused 
by accident, during the removal. " Out of compassion to his relict 
and children Left behinde him," the allotments were confirmed to 
them, without conditions. Mrs. Warner was advised, as were her 
relatives, to build a dwelling-house with all possible speed, and to 
inhabit there, or to cause some person to dwell there in her stead. 
Even in building, she was not compelled to abide by the time set 
for other settlers. The first death of a signer is believed to have 
been that of John Warner, Sen'', the father of Daniel. The priority 
of his death appears—in our records— only from the fact that he 
was not in Mattatuck when the first and second divisions of fence 
were ordered, while Daniel Warner is the active maker of his pro- 
portion, in both divisions. 

On the next day, the committee was again occupied with our 
interests. We learn at this session that Lieutenant vSamuel Steel laid 
out our first highways. East Main street was one of the number 
laid out by him. It is described as "that Highway at the east end 
of the Town plot at Mattatuck, running eastward out of Sayd Town 
plot, being Three rods wide." It was determined that it should be 
and remain for public and common use. It is further described as 
l3'ing between Joseph "Gaylers" lot, and a house lot of two acres 
"reserved for such inhabitant as shall hereafter be entertained." 
Joseph Gaylord's lot is now the site of Irving block. The reserved 
lot is the corner of East Main and South Main streets, reserved to 
be the birth-place of the renowned Samuel Hopkins. 



154 



HISTORY OF WATEIiBURY. 



It was on this memorable 27th of November, 1679, that certain 
lands were designated and set apart for a specified use forever. 
Why those lands are not to-day serving the uses for which they 
were set apart, is an unanswerable question. Here are the words 
of the authorized committee: "It is agreed and determined that 
the House Lott of Two Acres, lying at the east end of the Town 
abutting Northerly on Thomas Warner's Hous Lott, and a piece 
of Meadow and Swamp conteyning about fifteen Acres, by estima- 
tion lying upon Steele's Brook, [the bounds being given] and 
a piece of Land conteyning by estimation Three Acres, lying 
in the pasture Land, commonly so called, shall be and remayne 
for the use, occupation and improvement of the ministry of the 
sayd Town forever, without any alteration or dissposal, use or 
improvement whatsoever." The two-acre house lot was the third 
lot of the six two-acre lots that occupied the cast side of Bank 
street, between East Main and Grand streets. The well-known 
First Church property at the foot of Grand and Willow streets 
is the portion that is left of the three acres, lying in the pasture 
land. It is the only remaining fragment, the little crumb that 
is left of the generous loaf designed for the support of the 
ministry forever. The First Church was amply endowed by the 
Colony's committee, but permitted her inheritance to depart from 
her. Somewhere about eight hundred years hence, at the expira- 
tion of a lease, the fifteen acres on Steele's Brook may return 
to her. 

After providing for the ministry, the committee's next act was 
to encourage an inhabitant, by allowing " an additional House Lott 
to what was formerly allowed," to be laid out. And here we get an 
insight into the allotments that were before granted to each man, 
by the grants that were to accompany the new house lot. They 
were " eight acres on the old Town plot and a three acre lot." To 
the former grants were now to be added eight acres in the new 
division to be laid out, ten acres upon a plain on the west side of 
Steels meadow, and about twelve acres in " Buck " meadow 
"being an Island." When a town was in need of an inhabitant, 
because of his skill in any of the lines of its development, special 
grants were bestowed. This inhabitant thus provided for, was 
probably then in waiting. He was a man who was undoubtedly 
welcomed with all the greeting little Mattatuck had to offer, for he 
was a carpenter ! His name was vStephen Upson. He subscribed 
to the articles in December 1679, and probably made his mark on 
more than one of the houses that were waiting for the builder, for 
we have his testimony that"vSamuel Judd's house was shingled 



ORDERS OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COJUflTTEE. 155 

about Michaelmuss " and that "he went into it in November 16S1," 
and that "it was not fit before." 

The last bit of advice to the inhabitants on this day in Novem- 
ber 1679, was, to build a suthcient corn mill for the use of the 
town. Thirty acres of land were proffered to the persons who 
should build such a mill " and keep the same in good reparation for 
that work and service of grinding; Corne." The thirty-acres of land 
were to be laid out, to "be and remain to their heirs and assigns 
forever, he or they maynteyning the sayd grist mill, as afore sayd, 
forever." The last words of this meeting are the following: "We 
allow the standing of Thomas Warner's cellar without molestation, 
according to agreem' of Lieut. Sam" vSteel." This was also a con- 
cession probably because of bereavment, and it gives us the assur- 
ance that there was, at least, a cellar in Mattatuck, in Nov. 1679. 
John Warner had recently died. He had undoubtedly built the 
cellar of his house on his house lot on the east side of Exchange 
place. It must have occupied the land near where South Main 
street begins, also the part of Exchange place that was taken for 
that street when South Main street was laid out about 1806. It 
probably included the site of Apothecaries' Hall, it being the second 
lot from the northward of the six two-acre lots already referred to, 
as filling the space between East Main and Grand streets. The 
cellar may have been placed there before Lieutenant Steel laid out 
the highway, as it seems for some reason to have been an intru- 
sion upon it. However it may have been, the committee did not 
compel Thomas Warner, the son of John Warner deceased, to 
remove it, and it is agreeable to learn that the curved line of the 
east side of Bank street probably had its origin in a kindly intent 
toward the son of the man who was the first to die, of the men of 
Mattatuck. 

THE FOURTH MEETING. 

Major Talcott and Mr. John Wadsworth met at Hartford, May 
22, 1680, and appointed William Judd, Thomas Judd, and John 
Standly, or such others as the inhabitants of Mattatuck should 
appoint, to meet with men of Woodbury, to determine a bound line 
between the towns. Representing the town, John Welton and Samuel 
Hickcox acquiesced in the appointments made at Hartford, and 
declared that they did not see cause to appoint any other persons to 
determine the bound. This town act is the earliest, perhaps, on 
record, and indicates that the inhabitants had already chosen offi- 
cers, and before having been granted power to do so. The date is 
May 31, 1680. It appears upon the same paper with the commit- 
tee's act making the appointments, and is signed by John "Well- 



156 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



ton " and Samuel Hickcox "in the behalfe of the reste." Therefore 
John Welton and Samuel Hickcox were the first townsmen, or select- 
men. The same day, Major Talcott and Mr. Wadsworth sent a com- 
munication addressed: "To Our Friends at Mattatuck," in which 
more than a mile of new fence was ordered to be made. The need 
of this fence must have been very great, for the proprietors were 
directed to make it within nineteen da}s. 



THE FIFTH MEETING. 



This meeting was held at Farmington, on the fifth of February, 
1680. Three members were present. Town officers had been chosen 
by the inhabitants as before stated, and without apparent authority. 
The coinmittee gave power to the officers " to execute their respect- 
ive offices" and gave the inhabitants liberty, "being orderly called 
and convented " by their major vote, to choose their " Townsmen, 
constables, surveyors, fence-viewers and haywards, or any other 
civil officers, from time to time, without any farther order from the 
committee." 

Stephen Hopkins had, at this date, built a mill in Mattatuck. He 
was granted to have the "thirty acres appointed and intailed in a 
former order to such as should erect a mill there." To the thirty 
acres, the committee now added " so much more land as should be 
necessary to advance the grant to be in value of one hundred pound 
alottment." 

Deacon John Lankton, William Judd and David Carpenter, had 
been complained of for not meeting their obligations as subscribers. 
They had doubtless failed to arrive at Mattatuck with their families 
on or before May 30th, 1680, and their allotments, granted at Matta- 
tuck, were declared to be forfeited. vShould any persons appear and 
desire allotments, they, by subscribing, building a house, and set- 
tling in the place with their families within a year from the time 
of subscribing, were to be invested with the allotments. If the 
new subscribers failed to fulfill, the lands were to return to the 
committee. " Leavyes " for defraying the public charges, except 
for watching and warding, were to be raised upon the meadows for 
one year from date. Uplands were permitted to be added to the 
meadow lands of Isaac Bronson and Benjamin Judd, sufficient to 
raise the meadow land to the value of an hundred pound allotment. 
Thus early we hear the cry raised for more land to improve. The 
applicants are Daniel Porter and Thomas Richardson. The town 
was granted liberty to add the desired land and the committee 
appointed men to lay it out, and also to lay out to Stephen Hopkins, 
his lands. Necessary fences for securing lands under improvement 



ORDERS OF THE ASSEMBLY'S COMMITTEE. 157 

were again ordered to be made by the last of April, 1681. vStephen 
Upson complained that he was much straig-htened in his possession 
of lands. Whatever addition the town should see cause to lay out 
to him, was granted. A house lot of two acres was granted to 
Stephen Hopkins. It was ordered to be laid out " as conveniently 
as might be to suit the mill;" also a three acre lot, "according as 
the other inhabitants have granted." The final act was the grant 
to Benjamin Judd of " some land at the north end of his house lot, 
to build on." This was the first legalized encroachment upon the 
fine broad way laid out through the town plot. Our beautiful 
"Green" is the portion that testifies to its original width. To this 
grant of "some land," the condition was annexed, that the highwa}^ 
should always be and remain four and one-half rods wide. 



CHAPTER XII. 

THE INHABITANTS OF MATTATUCK ITS PLANTERS YOUNG MEN FARM- 

INGTON WELL REPRESENTED — THE PLANTATION OF 1681 THE 

GREEN PLAIN HOUSE LOTS SURROUNDING IT THE HOUSES THE 

OWNERS AND THEIR FAIMILIES. 

AN attempt, however imperfect its result may be, to gather by 
name and family the little band of town-bnilders that grad- 
ually constructed the com.pact village of Mattatuck, will not 
be without interest. It may be said, with approximate truth, that 
the plantation of 1677 was the work of young men. That these men 
were " poor " men has, in one way and another, been so impressed 
upon our minds, that we find it almost natural to think of 
them and to speak of them as pioneers, driven by stress of 
lands and worldly goods to leave Farmington and live in log 
houses in the wilderness, in order to eke out a livelihood; 
but the facts, as they have one after another been relieved 
from obscurity, compose a brighter picture. The young men were, 
with few exceptions, married men with families. Some of the 
number, perhaps every one who came from Farmington, owned his 
own house in that place. Dr. Henrv Bronson had not seen, when he 
pictured the log houses of the planters, the evidence granted to its, 
that the houses were both clapboarded and shingled. Neither did 
he know that his own ancestor — the John Bronson who is thought 
to have been of the company that migrated with the Rev. Mr. 
Hooker from JMassachusetts Bay in 1636; who owned a house lot 
and other lands in Hartford in 1639; who was a soldier in the 
Pequot war, and who w^as one of the earliest settlers in Farmington 
— that he, also, reached out his aging hands to bless in the most 
practical manner the beginnings of our town. AVe find that he had 
here, when he died in 1680, the early form of the saw-mill — in a " pitt 
saw, Tiller and box." He also had other implem.ents of the builder, 
given in the inventory of his estate as "at Mattatuck." They were 
" 4 plaine stocks with Iron and file. 3 Augurs and a zest [rest], a plow 
stock Irons and chisell." Beside these, he had here, cattle, and 
"one^small feather bed." 

Farmington did not send out men whom she could spare, because 
they were "unwholesome members of her community," to found 
Mattatuck. She parted with some of her very best men; men who 
had assisted to lay her own foundation walls; men who were and 



J/J 7'J TUCK A S A FLA XTA TIO^\ 1 5 9 

who continued to be owners of many fruitful acres in her beautiful 
valley; young men, whom she needed to serve her own places and 
purposes. There were not many families of note in Farmington 
that were not represented here by some one of their number. The 
Farmington church, that stood for all that was highest and best in 
the civil and social life of the time, yielded to us abundantly of her 
treasures. More than thirty of the men and women who came here, 
and who were dwelling in their own houses before the last of May, 
16S1, came hither out of the full communion of that church. The 
greater number of them had spent their entire lives tinder its influ- 
ence, guided by the religious teachings of Reverend Roger Newton 
and Reverend Samuel Hooker— while at least six of them could 
remember a boy-life in Hartford, and the teachings of Reverend 
Thomas Hooker. Beside these, the church parted, a little later, 
with Robert Porter, one of her seven pillars, and doubtless would 
have yielded to us another one, had John Bronson, vSenior, lived to 
accompany his three sons in their removal. Whatever may be said 
of the planters of Mattatuck, it must, through all time, be admitted 
that they were a people— God-fearing, God-worshiping, God-loved, 
and we hope, God-loving. That they were well-born and well-bred, 
we know, for we have followed, even though it has been in a very 
imperfect and fragmentary manner, the path leading through time, 
and marked with the events in which they and they fathers had 
been led from 1628 to 1677. 

Of the elder men who ventured themselves to brave the discom- 
forts and dangers incident to migration; who attended the prepar- 
atory stages of the plantation, guiding its initial steps with their 
experience; not one, so far as we have learned, perfected his resi- 
dence as an inhabitant in 16S1. John Warner, vSenior, another 
soldier of the Pequot war, had passed on in the endless migration to 
the Unknown, before that time came; John Bronson, as we have seen, 
had already followed him, while John Andrews, Senior, was about 
to write his will, in which he describes himself as "grown aged," 
and "attended with many weaknesses," and even John Langdon— a 
deacon, at a later day, in the Farmington church— who had been 
energetically interested in the plantation, carrying up to the Court 
the petition for its formation, and paying the ten shillings neces- 
sary for the sending of it on its courtly way, failed to secure his 
position as inhabitant and proprietor— thus leaving young men at 
the front in everv line of endeavor. 



i6o 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Highway 



WUlow 



.y 6^rc€if Lot 
He*' John South-mt^ 



^ dre^Ji^t/T* ^nr/f 



7 ^frf} 









rh€ fiam« /or th€ Mm 



T'A^'fias fittAartt 



EdrrtttfUi Sr^/r 



John ^arrtn^nn 






/<.r son Dujrui y"^/ 



n Thamt^j ^ta/^/ far J^An Jur/t/ 






T^/rUHJ //iEV^kCV 






Th^/m^ J Ju/f^ Jr 



Of>f^/n^^ /tir/r/7/-r/j 



Tha/n/*j Jis^*^ for jgft Sa/niul 



Samuff JIk/isz 






n o w Han /c *Sy rrct . 



not!} y^orth \fain Slrccf aru^ Linden Snvot* 



^1 




J 


5 ' a 

3 ? 


Iff 


J 1 S 



5 2 
I ^ 



HOUSE LOTS OF MATTATUCK, IGSl. [The top of the page is west ] 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 



i6i 



The central fact of the early New England village, was its green 
plain. Around it and along its very borders the town plot was laid 
out. Its surrounding house lots were narrow and deep. The green 
plain of Mattatuck, the eastern portion of which is now called, 
sometimes the Green, and sometimes Centre vSquare, was at the time 
of the settlement but little more than the marshy result of a former 
swamp. It has required time and much labor to evolve it into its 




DR. HENRY BRONSON S MAP. 



present form of beauty. The inost careful research, reveals to us 
the town spot, as it was laid out imder the care of the Assembly's 
Committee. On the north side of the green plain were twelve 
house lots — on its south side, twelve — on Willow street, four — on the 
north street, four — on Bank street, four. Thirty-one of the number 
were allotted to the thirty-one men who were the signers of 1674. 
One was given to Stephen Upson. One was bestowed upon the 



,52 HISTORY OF WATEBBURY. 

miller. Three remained as great-lot house lots for the benefit of 

the public. 

We introduce here (see page i6o) an outline map of these 
lots, with explanations. The small lot of three-quarters of an acre, 
on which now stands the stately ruin of the Judge Kingsbury house, 
was given to young Thomas Judd, the son of William, when he 
became of age to receive it. Two house lots have been added to the 
plot although they were not laid out until about 1685. This has 
been done in order to show their true position in the plan. They 
were bestowed, one upon Samuel Scott (a son of Edmund), the other 
upon Richard Porter. The Atkins building, at the corner of Grand 
and Bank streets, is on the lot of Richard Porter. The map of 
" Mattatuck Village " that was prepared for Dr. Bronson's History 
of Waterbury is also reproduced. It represents not only the 
earliest house lots, but also a period later in the history of the town. 
He placed three house lots below Grand street because one of the 
number Richard Porter's, required a highway for its south bound, 
and he 'did not find that part of Grand street that lies eastward 
from Bank street. We find that Grand street east of Bank street, 
beino- an original highway, was conveyed in 1697 to Richard Porter 
in exchange^for the Union Square front of his Bank street lot. 
Thus early did the townsmen begin the work of diverting the lands 
which had been granted to the ministry in perpetuity, from the 
orio-inal intent of the grantors ; for this temporary closing of a por- 
tion of Grand street was the entering wedge that opened the way 
for the relinquishment of the ministry lot on Bank street, for other 
land, and this took place while the founders of the town were 
living The street was re-opened April 9, 17 12. 

We have so long delayed to introduce the inhabitants of Matta- 
tuck by name, that we are come to November in the year i6si. It 
is now six months since the time expired that was granted by the 
committee for finishing the houses. The past year has been one 
of o-reat trials to the elder towns, and we may be quite certain that 
this new plantation has had its full share of tribulations. Rever- 
end Simon Bradsti-eet tells us in his journal, that during June, 
Tulv and Auo-ust of this vear a great drouth prevailed, destroying 
corn and o-raJs to the value of many thousand pounds. The drouth 
was followed bv " a malignant fever of which many died m many 
nlaces in the colonv during September and October." The " rod of 
the an-er of the most High had been shaken" so severely over the 
neople^that, for the first time in its history, the General Assembly 
closed its October session without the appointment of a day for 
general thanksgiving. " And yet," the Reverend journalist^ adds : 
-there was enough left for a meat and a drmk ortering. 



MA TTA TUCK AS A PL ANT A TION. 163 

The specifications for hoiise-buildino- formulated in 1674 by the 
committee, were exceedingly simple. It was not forbidden to build 
a palace, but it was required that every man should have a good, 
substantial dwelling house, at least eighteen feet long, sixteen feet 
wide, and nine feet between "joynts, with a good chimney in the 
fore sayd place." The -fore sayd place" has not before been 
mentioned, but it probably referred to the chimney-space It 
seems highly probable that the earliest effort at a habitation 
was one erected in common, with sufficient of comfort for the 
workers during the week, and that the men, inured to riding, 
thought little of returning to their families at Farmington as often 
as occasion required. But the time has now arrived when each 
man should be found living in his own finished house, with his 
family abiding with him. 

We will begin our acquaintance with the founders of the town 
at the southeast corner of the "Green." The lot is marked on the 
plan "Deacon Thomas Judd for John Judd," with the name of 
" Abraham Andrews, cooper," beneath it. We find this lot without 
a house upon it. We have already learned why John Judd gave up 
his claim to Mattatuck lands. Abraham Andrews, his successor, 
although he has attained his thirty-third year, is still waiting for 
his coming bride. vShe will be vSarah, the daughter of Robert Por- 
ter, and will arrive from Farmington at some time during the com- 
ing year. 

On the lot lying to the westward, Daniel Porter, the well-known 
surgeon of the River Towns, or his son Daniel, has built a house, 
but it has no chimney. The younger Daniel himself, although he 
is now twenty-nine years old, seems to have neither fireside nor 
wife. Eighteen years later, in 1699, we shall find him living in this 
house with his wife, Deborah Holcomb, and one child. 

Adjoining the Porter lot, and where now is standing our Town 
and City Hall, we find the house of Timothy Standly. In 1634, John 
Stanley died while on the passage from England to New England, 
leaving three little children. One of the children died. Tht two' 
John and his sister Ruth, were left to the care of their uncles 
Thomas and Timothy (their father's brothers), between whom the 
estate of John Stanley was divided by the Court for the benefit of 
the children. The little boy, John, became Captain John 
"Standly," of Farmington, and was the father of the Mattatuck 
Standlys. We find Timothy Standly's house "large enough and 
ovned." In it are living Timothy himself, who is twenty-nine 
years old, and his wife, Mary Strong, of Windsor. They have been 
m.arried five years, and are without children. 



jg^ • BISTORT OF WATERBUBY. 

On the fourth lot, where now is the Silas Bronson Library build- 
ing Leavenworth street, and a part of the Kendrick homestead 
land John Carrinoton is living, with his wife and their four chil- 
dren. John is about thirty-nine years old. The children are : 
John, age 14 years, Hannah, age 6 years, 

Mary, age 9 years, Clark, age 3 years. 

There is an interest and a pathos about this name John Carrington 
It is connected with an event so pathetic that it sends shudders of 
pity through all the years from 1650 to 1892; and yet there are 
events occtu'ring every day in the current of our boasted civilization 
that will, without doubt, send the self-same storm of pity surging 
throuo-h the hearts of men and women two hundred and fifty years 
hence-events that we accept without a protest. John Carrington 
and his wife, Joane, of Wethersfield, in 1650, were tried before the 
court at Hartford for the crime of witchcraft. Our John Carrington 
was then a lad of about eight years. We are not able to say that he 
was the child of the above John and Joane Carrington, but there 
seems to be no reason to doubt that such was the fact. " At a Par- 
ticular Court in Hartford on the 20th of February 1650, John Car- 
rington and Joane Carrington of Wethersfield, were on trial for 
their lives." We find the following : 

JOHN CARKIXGTON'S IXDrrEMEXT. 

"John Carrington thou art indited by the name of John Carring- 
ton of Wethersfield, carpenter, that not having the feare of God 
before thine eyes thou hast Interteined ffamiliarity with vSathan 
the great Enemye of God and mankind and by his helpe hast done 
workes above the course of nature for w^h both according to the 
Lawe of God and the Established Law of this Commonwealth thou 

deservest to dye. ^ ^ \ c 

The Jury findes this Inditem' against John Carrington the 6th ot 

March i64'|." . 

Then follows the name of his wife Joane, and the same mdite- 
ment in the same words, with the same finding by the same jury. 
On this jury we find men with whose names we are already 
familiar. Thomas Judd, William Lewis, Stephen Heart and Mr. 
Tailcoat, the father of our Major Talcott, are of the number. That 
the finding of this jury was followed by the execution of John and 
Joane Carrington, may be inferred from the following entry. I 
have not the date of it : " There was presented to this Courte an 
inventory of John Carrington's estate which was ordered to be filed, 
but not recorded." The inventory on file has never been found. 
We return, from this painful departure, to Mattatuck, and find the 



MA TTA TUCK AS A PLANTATION'. 165 

house of John Carrington too small to meet the requirements of the 
committee, although large enough to hold many bitter recollections 
for its owner. 

On the next lot — belonging to Edmund Scott— we find a house 
perfect according to the specifications of the committee. Not a com- 
plaint has been made against the work of this man. The original 
house lot of the late Hon. Green Kendrick, together with Leav- 
enworth street, occupies all of Edmund Scott's lot, and one-half of 
John Carrington's lot. In this perfect habitation we find a family 
notable for the number of its members who fell victims to the rage 
of the Indian. The family consists of Edmund, his wife, who was 
Elizabeth Fuller and the widow of Thomas Upson, seven sons and 
one daughter.* No other one of the proprietors is so well equipped 
with sons as is Edmund Scott. It is not surprising that many acres 
on mountain and in meadow are early recorded to the Scott name, 
when we find that the boys of the following list are aids to their 
father in subduing the wilderness. The following ages are esti- 
mated from the records of the Probate Court: 

Joseph, about 20 years, George, about 12 years, 

Edmund, about 18 years, David, about 10 years, 

Samuel, about 16 years, Robert, about 8 years, 

Jonathan, about 15 years, Ehzabeth, about 5 years. 

On Thomas Richason's two-acre lot we find no house in 1681, for 
he is living with his wife, Mary, and their seven children, in a cel- 
lar. The language of the complaint is that he " ////rs a cellar to 
live in." The children are : 

Mary, age 14 years, Israel, 

Sarah, age 12 years, Rebecca, born in Waierbury, April 

John, age 9 years, 27th, 1679, 

Thomas, age 7 years, Ruth, age 6 months. 

We have here the record of the birth of the first English child of 
Mattatuck. It is difficult to understand why Thomas Richason is 
living in a cellar in 1681, when we learn, by the record of the birth 
of his daughter Rebecca, that he has been living in Mattatuck at 
least two and one-half years. The construction of the early houses 
was such that many of them were easily burned; but, had disaster by 
fire fallen upon this proprietor— the man who held the least interest 
in the township, his right being but fifty pounds — the committee 
would surely have forborne to take away his allotments. 

*The oldest known grave in ancient Waterbury is, with little if any doubt, the grave of Joseph, the 
eldest son of this family. It lies in a lonely spot in the very heart of the wilderness— about half a mile west 
from Reynolds Bridge— and marks the spot where he was killed by Indians. This was before February of 



1 66 HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 

The lot to the westward on which will be found " The house for 
the minister," is one of the three house lots belonging to the 
same number of great-lots, that were set apart by the committee 
for special service to the community. One of the number will be 
seen at the west end of " the " highway, or West Main street, the 
other on "a" highway, or Bank street. The one on Bank street had 
been devoted to the "ministry" already, but in this same year, the 
dwelling houses having been fairly well completed, one for each 
family, the question arose, " Which of the great-lots shall be for the 
minister's use?''' This question was asked in a letter written a few 
months later in the same year, on February 20, 1681, by Timothy 
Standly, and Abraham Andrews, " select men," to the committee. 
Surely this was commendable promptness on the part of the 
founders of the town in preparing the way for the coming min- 
ister of the gospel. The answer of the committee was deferred 
until April, when it was given in the following words : " We 
leave it to your judgment, to be determined by the major part 
of the inhabitants, and if you cannot agree, we shall determine." 
We infer that the lot was chosen by the inhabitants, in the absence 
of any evidence contrary to that inference. The house that was 
built on that lot, it is thought, occupied a site that included the 
land on which the extreme southern portion of the house of Mrs. 
John C. Booth is standing. 

Next west of the minister's house, is a lot that was originally 
allotted to William Higginson, who was twenty-six years of age at 
the time he signed the Articles in 1674. His wife was Sarah, the 
daughter of John Warner, Senior, thus associating with the first days 
of the Plantation, as original planters, John Warner, his sons John, 
Daniel, and Thomas, and his daughter Sarah — the date of whose 
marriage with William Higginson I have not learned — as well 
as the third generation of Warners, in the children of John, Junior, 
Thomas, and Daniel. This lot was siibsequently bestowed upon 
Edmund Scott, Junior. Our only authority for the ages of the 
children of Edmund Scott is the Probate Court record, according 
to which, Edmund, Junior, is at this time, about eighteen years of 
age, and yet he had been granted the house lot of William Higgin- 
son in 1679, and his house is now complained of, because it has no 
chimney. The gift at this time, to Edmund Scott, Junior, from his 
father, of a house on the same lot, in order to avoid the forfeiture 
of his son's allotments, suggests that we perhaps ought to find two 
houses on the lot. 

The next lot is Benjamin Judd's. He has been living nominally 
in Mattatuck, several years, but delayed to finish his house until 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 167 

two months ago. His wife is Mary, the daughter of Captain 
William Lewis of Farmington — Benjamin is not yet forty years 
of age. His wife is thirty-six. Their children are: 

Benjamin, age 10 years, Sarah, age 4 years, 

Mary, age 6 years, Hannah, age 2 months. 

The next house lot is John Welton's. His age and parentage are 
unknown. On this lot he has built a house to the acceptance of his 
townsmen, for no complaint has been made by them to the com- 
mittee. In it, John is living with his wife, Mary, and their six 
children. 

Abigail, age 14 years, John, age 8 years, 

Mary, age 12 years, Stephen, age 3 years, 

Elizabeth, age 10 years, Richard, age 19 months. 

Especial interest is attached to the above infant, Richard Wel- 
ton, because family tradition claims his birth as that of the first 
English male child in Mattatuck. An account "of the Welton 
family in Waterbury," by Richard Welton, who writes that he (the 
writer) ''is the great-grandson of John Welton, who came from 
England," gives the date of Richard's birth as "September 27, 
1679 ; " but it is the only date given in the manuscript. Our town 
record states that this child was " born in Waterbury, sometime in 
March, 1680." Assimiing that the public record is the true one, 
Richard Welton seems to have two competitors for the honor. One 
of them is little John Warner, who by record was " born in Water- 
bury, March 6th, 1680 ; " the other is Abraham Andrews, the next 
door neighbor of yoimg Richard. 

Abraham Andrews, Senior, was early on the ground, and seems to 
have fulfilled all his obligiitions with great faithfulness. His house 
lot is next west of John Welton's. Here he lives with his wife 
Rebecca Carrington, daughter it is believed of John Carrington of 
Wethersfield, and sister of John Carrington of Mattatuck, with their 
four children, 

Rebecca, age 9 years, Hannah, 2ge 3 years, 

Mary, age 7 years, Abraham, born October 14th, 16S0. 

The record of Abraham Andrews' children does not say that this 
Abraham was born in Waterbury, but, as one of the requirements 
was that the proprietors should be personally living with their 
families at Mattatuck by May, 1680, and other men have been com- 
plained of because they were not here at that time, and Abraham 
has escaped all censure, we infer that he was living here in his 
own house when this child was born. Based upon the above as a 
conclusion, the birth of this young Abraham Andrews antedates 
that of Richard Welton and John Warner by five months. 



1 68 HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 

Next west, we find a " great-lot," — house lot, whose first occu- 
pant will be Reverend John Southmayd, about 1704. 

Having reached AVillow street, we find on its western border a 
lot with John Langton's name on it. Of this lot we know little. 
There was probably no house upon it. 

Benjamin Jones is the owner and occupier of the adjoining lot. 
His wife is Hannah Spencer, to whom he has been married twenty 
years. They have at least one child, Benjamin, age unknown. 
Benjamin Jones has been absent from the plantation too much to 
please his neighbors, and complaints have been made ; but, as he 
was on the ground in time, and built his house in time, the commit- 
tee will ignore complaints. This is also the lot on which John 
Andrews, the father of Abraham, the cooper, intended to build and 
live. 

We will pass by the small lot of only three-quarters of an acre, 
on which young Thomas Judd will live when he becomes of age to 
receive lands. Crossing West Main street, we come to the home- 
stead of the late Judge Bronson. It is the scene of Abraham Bron- 
son's early attempts to settle in Mattatuck. This was before Lyme 
and his wife Hannah, the daughter of Matthew Griswold of that 
plantation, lured him away. He was married three months after 
the articles were signed, and was living in Mattatuck in 1677. Now 
we find John wScovill in possession, the allotments having been 
conferred upon him by the committee. John Scovill's house is 
without a chimney. In 1688 "the town of Farmington voted to have 
a town house to keep school in." It was to be eighteen "foot" 
square "besides the chimney space." Mr. Julius Gay, of Farming- 
ton, in his " Schools and Schoolmasters in Farmington in the Olden 
Time," refers to the above clause relating to the chimney as " sig- 
nificant," and tells us that " chimneys were at first built on the out- 
side of the hoiises; that they were not built of bricks, for there 
were no bricks in the country except those brought by the Dutch- 
men from Holland; that they were not built of stone, because there 
was no lime for mortar but the little that could be obtained from 
the burning of oyster shells. Accordingly, chimneys were built of 
wood, laid up log-house fashion, and lined with clay. Of course the 
clay was continually coming off and the houses taking fire." How- 
ever the chimneys of Farmington may have been built, the men of 
Waterbury built stone chimneys, laid in clay, at Sivery early date, and 
there is reason to think that the houses of the first settlers were 
constructed with stone chimneys. There was a house, built, it is 
thought, by the first Stephen Upson — it was certainh^ given by him 
to his son Stephen — that had a stone chimney. It stood on the 



3fATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 



169 



southwest corner of Grand and Bank streets, and was taken down 
in 1839, after the death of David Prichard, who had lived in it more 
than a century. The late Johnson house, that was built before 1723, 
by a son of John Scovil, the planter, had a stone chimney, laid in 
clay; while the heirs of another "signer" divided among them- 
selves the house of their father, even to the stones of the chimney. 
Two of the houses referred to certainly had chimneys in the centre. 
The fact that there are in 1681 four houses without chimneys, cer- 
tainly indicates that the chimney was supplementary to the house. 
John Scovill has been married about sixteen years. His wife is 
Sarah, the daughter of Thomas Barnes, of Farmington. Their chil- 
dren are John, who is about fifteen years of age, William, Benjamin, 
and perhaps others. 

Lying to the northward of the John Scovill lot is the habitation 
of William Judd. William, three of his brothers and John Stanley, 
communicated to the church at Farmington their desire to remove 
to Mattatuck. The following is the reply that was made concern- 
ing William's request : " Particularly to our brother William Judd, 
that it having pleased God to deal so bountifully with him, that not 
many of the brethren with us have so large accomiuodations as him- 
self, yet see not his call to remove on account of straightness for 
outward subsistence and therefore counsel him, if it may be with 
satisfaction to his spirit, to continue his abode with us, hoping God 
will bless him in so doing." In May 1680, William's family was not 
living in Mattatuck. Because of this omission his allotments were 
taken from him. But last March he accepted them again and 
promised to live in Mattatuck. Therefore, we expect to find him in 
November of 1681, very comfortably housed. He is about forty- 
five years old ; has been married twenty-three years to Mary, the 
daughter of John Steele. Their eldest child, Mary, has been for two 
years the wife of Abel Jones, of Northampton. The children at 
Mattatuck are six: 

Thomas, age 18 years, Samuel, age S years, 

John, age 14 years, Daniel, age 6 years, 

Rachel, age 11 years, EHzabeth, age 3 years. 

Returning to West Main street, on the corner where Mr. Charles 
Mitchell is now living, we find John Warner, Junior. He has built 
his house without delay or deficiency, unconscious of the fact that 
he is living on the ground where sixty years later will be erected 
the first Church of England edifice in the Naugatuck Valley. Here 
we find him with his wife and their five children: 

John, age 11 years, Ebenezer, age 4 j-ears, 

Ephraim, about 11 years, Lydia, age 6 months. 

Robert, aafe unknown. 



170 



BISTORT OF WATERBURY. 



Next eastward is the lot given to John Porter and resigned by 
him in 1677, we know not why. David Carpenter was the next owner, 
but he is under sentence of forfeiture. It stands now in the hands 
of the committee awaiting the coming of Robert Porter in 1684. 

Going eastward we find on the next lot, containing one and 
three-quarter acres, the unfinished house of Thomas Hancox. It 
is "covered almost all and clabborded and noe chimney." Three 
of his neighbors testify that he has "deserted the place, being gone 
all or the greatest [part] of the year past." Thomas Hancox has 
the largest estate, save one — that of William Lewis — in Farmington. 
This evidence does not speak well for Thomas, and perhaps not for 
Rachel Leonard of Springfield, who, apparently, keeps him waiting 
for three years before she consents to live in ]\Iattatuck as Mrs. 
Hancox. Meanwhile, the settlers will complain relentlessly; 
Thomas will return to duty; sign anew the promise to keep his 
pledges ; finish his house, and perhaps furnish his neighbors with 
food, for Thomas Hancox is a butcher. He will stay long enough 
to perfect his title as a proprietor — to have two islands, a brook, 
beautiful meadows, and one little child, bear his name — and then he 
will flit to Farmington, to Hartford, to Farmington again — and 
years afterward a grandson will sell his rights in the township. 

On the lot bearing the name of Samuel Gridley, with Thomas 
Newell beneath it, we find Thomas, aged thirty-one years, with his 
wife, Elizabeth Wrotham, and their infant son Thomas. " He came 
not according to Articles ; neither built according to Articles. Ye 
house not finished in time." The time, it will be remembered, was 
the thirtieth of last May. 

John Bronson has the first two-acre house lot that we have met 
with since leaving Willow street. He has the honor of having per- 
formed the conditions of his contract to the acceptance of his towns- 
men and the committee. No complaint has been made. His age is 
thirty-seven. His wife is Sarah, the daughter of Moses Ventrus. 
Her age is thirty-two. Their children are: 

John, age 11 years, Dorothy, age six years, 

Sarah, age g years, " Ebenezer, age 4 years. 

Thomas Judd, Jr., has a larger house lot than has been allotted 
to any of his neighbors to the westward, for it is two and one- 
cjuarter acres. This Thomas Judd, "Junior" in Farmington, is to 
become our Lieutenant Judd. He will be our first deputy to the 
General Court. Dr. Bronson speaks of him as, "the leading man of 
the infant town." He has followed in John Bronson's footsteps. 
He arrived in time. His family was in Mattatuck by the last of 
May, 1680, and the last of May, 16S1, he was living in his own finished 



3IATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 



171 



house, his family abiding with him. He is now forty-three years 
of age. About twenty-one years ago Thomas Judd married Sarah, 
the daughter of John Steel of Farmington. Their children are : 

Thomas, about iS years, John, about 12 years. 

Sarah, about 16 years, 

The next lot was bestowed upon Daniel Warner. It will be 
remembered that he died two years ago, when the family was mov- 
ing from Farmington to Mattatuck. We may expect to find that 
Mrs. Warner has built her house according to the advice of the 
committee, and that she is living in it with her children : 

Daniel, age 14 years, Samuel, age 6 years, 

John, age 10 years, Thomas, age 4 years. 

Abigail, age 8 years. 

The lot of Obadiah Richards lies to the eastward of the Warner 
lot. It contains three acres. He has built a house, but " it is not 
according to the dimensions of articles." Whether the length 
was too long, or the breadth was too narrow, we are not informed ; 
neither are we told that the house was too small. Dr. Bronson tells 
us that Obadiah Richards joined the settlement early ; that 
he had an old Town Plot lot, and that he made his propor- 
tion of fence in all the divisions, but that he had a tardy, slip-shod 
way of doing things, and that when the crisis came it was found 
that he had not rendered a full compliance with the conditions of 
the articles, and his allotments were condemned — that he mended 
his ways, however, and his rights were restored. By means of the 
paper on which Major Talcott recorded the complaints, we learn 
the exact nature of each proprietor's sin against the law of the 
committee, and are able to do justice to the memory of Obadiah Rich- 
ards. So far from being " slip-shod," he certainly has been exceed- 
ingly enterprising and industrious to have accomplished so much 
as has been done in the way of house and home building, especially 
when we stop to consider that he has but one boy to help, and five 
little girls to hinder him in his struggle with the wilderness. He 
was granted the only three-acre house lot fronting the green plain. 
It extended on the north to present Grove street. Before the 
estate to which this house belongs is settled, the lot and the house 
will be divided among the sons and the daughters, even to the 
sto?ies of the chimney. About fifteen years ago, when about twenty- 
eight years old, Obadiah Richards married Hannah, the daughter of 
John and Mary Andrews, of Farmington. Their children are : 
John, age 14 years, Elizabeth, age 6 years, 

Mary, age 12 years, " Sarah, age 4 years, 

Hannah, age 10 years, Obadiah, age 2 years. 

Esther, age 8 years, 



172 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



On March 21st, 1679, in the old nieetino--house at Farmington, 
Obadiah Richards and his wife presented their seven children for 
baptism. It was probably just before their removal to Mattatuck. 
We find the same seven children here in 1681. 

The next lot will be found marked Thomas Judd, for son Sam", 
and beneath, Philip Judd. Samuel Judd was not of age in 1674, 
therefore his father became responsible for him. In the house on 
this lot we have the pleasure to present to all whom she may inter- 
est, the first English bride of Mattatuck. vShe is only eighteen, and 
the wedding journey has been from Massachusetts to jNIattatuck. 
The arrival and the moving into the new house has taken place this 
very month. The bride is Mariah, the daughter of Thomas and 
Mary Strong, of Northampton. In his "Thomas Judd and his 
Descendants," Mr. Sylvester Judd tells us that this marriage cere- 
mony took place "about 1681." We are able to add to that testimony 
that " Samuel Judd built and went into his house in JNIattatuck in 
Novemb^, '81: and not fit before — that it was shingled about Mich- 
aelmus." The above testimony was given by Stephen Upson, Isaac 
Bronson, and Daniel Porter. The first child of vSamuel Judd was 
born in the October following. Philip Judd did not become the occu- 
pant until 1687. 

Joseph Hickok * is the owner and occupier of the next lot, hav- 
ing- met and fulfilled all the recpiired conditions. We find Joseph 
Hikcox and his wife in their finished house with their children: 

Joseph, age 9 years, I\Iary, age 5 years, 

Benjamin, age 7 years, Elizabeth, age 2 years. 

Samuel Hickox, one of the influential men of Mattatuck, lives to 
the eastward of his brother Joseph. In every way, he seems to have 
done his duty, and although he is not one of the eleven planters 
whose interests are represented by ;^ioo, we expect to find on his 
lot a larger and a fairer house than his neighbors have indulged in. 

His wife is Hannah . Their children are: 

Samuel, age 13 years, Thomas, age 7 years, 

Hannah, age 11 years, Joseph, age 4 j-ears, 

William, age 9 years, Mary, age i j-ear. 

We are now come to the house lot occupied in part in 1892, 
by The Citizens' Bank and by Mr. Henry Scovill. Richard Sea- 
mer was the first recipient of it. He built his proportion of the 



* This name, now usually rendered Hicko.x, has been given in many forms, seemingly ranging at pleasure 
from Hitchcock to Hicks. When Samuel Hickox, brother of Joseph, signed his name to the inventory of 
the estate of John Bronson in Mattatuck, in 1680, the recorder at Hartford made it Samuel Hitchcock. The 
baptismal records at Farmington give it as Hitchcock, and as Hickcock. Waterbury Records usually render 
it Hikcox. While upon the tombstone of a member of the same family was placed the name Hicks. There 
lies before me an agreement, made in 1707, between William and Benjamin Hickox, sons of Samuel the 
planter, to which their autographs are appended. The one is William Hickcox, the other, Benjamin Hecock. 



MATTATTICK AS A PLANTATION. 



173 



first division of the common fence, and then left the plantation. 
Benjamin Barnes was his successor. There is a house upon the lot 
at this date. Benjamin Barnes is twenty-eight years of age. The 
name of his wife we know only as Sarah — and the date of the mar- 
riage has not been found. Benjamin, their first child of which we 
have record, was born in 16S4. ^lention is here made of this Ben- 
jamin Barnes to preserve the fact that his grave-stone is the oldest 
one known to be within the 
ancient township of Waterbury. 
It is here given, and is identified 
from its date, 17-9, and the ini- 
tials B. B. Benjamin Barnes 
died in 1709, aged twenty-five 
years. The stone was discover- 
ed in 1890, in the Grand street 
cemetery. It had sunken until 
the rough edge only of what 
appeared to be a common field 
stone was raised perhaps a half- 
inch out of the soil. It bears a 
date at least seventeen years 
earlier than any other tomb- 
stone in the township.* 

Leaving the green plain, we 
turn to the left, enter the North 
highway, and visit the most 
northern habitation of the plan- 
tation. No latch-string is out, for 
John Newell, his neighbors say, 
does not stay at home. His house 

is finished and waiting. John Newell's life-story we may not tell 
He brings no bride to cheer the North-street house during all the 
lonely thirteen years that he holds it. His age is thirty-nine years. 
The name upon the lot is "Thomas Newell son." 

We turn to his neighbor on the south, the reliable Isaac Bron- 
son. He is a man who seems in all ways to have been faithful to 
his promises, building on his four-acre lot in time, and " according 
to articles," and therefore not afraid to enter complaints against 
others. Isaac is thirty-five years of age. His wife is Mary, the 
daughter of John Root of Farmington. Their children are: 

Isaac, age 11 years, Samuel, age 5 years, 

John, age 8 years, Mary, age i year. 

* It is now in the keeping of the writer, as is also the tomb-stone of Hannah Hopkins, the grandmother 
of the renowned Reverend Samuel Hopkins, D. D. 




J74 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



John vStandly, Junior, or, as usually written on Waterbury 
Records, John Standly, is the occupier of the next lot, containing 
three and one-half acres. In 1681, this young man of thirty-four 
years is quite unconscious of the important position he is destined 
to fill during the coming fourteen years of the town's life. Our 
regret is that he did not see the importance of copying, for preser- 
vation, more of the events connected with the early days of planta- 
tion and town. He was appointed to perform that duty by his 
townsmen after he left Waterbury. It is now twelve years since 
Hester Newell (the sister of John, who has the house two doors 
above) and John Stanley were married in Farmington. It is evi- 
dent that these parents have known the broadening touch of sorrow, 
for bereavement has been their lot. Before coming to Mattatuck, 
they lost two children, Esther and John. Their children in 1681 are: 

Esther, age 7 years, Nathaniel, age 2 years. 

Samuel, age 4 3'ears, 

On the next and last lot before reaching East Main street, we 
find the land originally allotted to Thomas Gridley; but it does 
not appear that he even attempted to make a rod of the common 
fence, or to fulfill any of the duties incumbent upon a "signer." 
John Stanley, naturally wishing his own sister, wSarah Gaylord, to 
live next door, assumed the responsibility of Thomas Gridley's 
allotments in behalf of Joseph Gaylord, her husband. Joseph 
Gaylord is thirty-two years of age, his wife is twenty-nine. Their 
children are : 

Sarah, age 10 years, John, age 4 years, 

Joseph, age S years, William, age i year, 

and perhaps Benjamin and Elizabeth. The record of Joseph Gay- 
lord's children is not quite satisfactory, either as to their number, 
order, or ages. Neither is his house quite satisfactory, but, "it is 
large enough and ovned." 

Crossing "the highway runningeastwardout of the Town Plat, " 
on the south-east corner of the green plain (now East and South 
Main streets) we are at the house lot " reserved for such inhabitant 
as should thereafter be entertained." The " entertained " resident 
guest proved, as we know, to be the miller, Stephen Hopkins. The 
mill at Hartford from its beginning seems to have been held in the 
Hopkins family; Governor Edward Hopkins himself owning the 
mill or an interest in it. It is not easy to recognize through the 
centuries the exact condition of this lot in Mattatuck in 1687. It is 
less than two years since this two acre lot was bestow^ed upon 
Stephen Hopkins, who had built the corn-mill in 1680, but what 
may be found upon it in November 1681, we are not able to record. 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 17^ 

Occupying- the next lot to the southward, on which is the name 
*' John Warner, Sr." with " Thomas Warner " beneath it, we find the 
son, Thomas Warner. This is the land it will be remembered upon 
which a cellar had been made in 1679, the cellar which the Assem- 
bly's Committee permitted to stand. Thomas Warner has failed to 
build his house in time. It is not finished, but that fact does not 
necessarily prevent our finding that his family is living- in it, and 
as our records tell us that a son was born to Thomas Warner in 
Mattatuck, March 6, 1680, and the family continued here, we may 
expect to find him here with his wife Elizabeth, and their children 

Elizabeth, age unknown, John, age 20 months. 

Benjamin, age unknown. 

Southward of Thomas Warner's homestead lies the house lot 
belonging- to the " Ministry." On a lot south of the above lies the 
new house lot that was laid out for Stephen Upson, the accepted 
proprietor. Stephen has without doubt built his house, but his 
home lot lies in a lonely spot, he having no next-door neighbor 
and it ma)' be that he is permitted to live on the south side of the 
g-recn plain, where he has a merry company of half-brothers, for his 
mother is now the wife of Edmund Scott. vStephen is destined to 
wait another year for his home, and his wife, Mary Lee, who will 
come from Farmington. Nearly all that Mattatuck gains, Farm- 
ington must lose. 

Thus we find that in i68r, Mattatuck is a village of twenty- 
eight dwelling-houses. Fifteen of the number are finished houses, 
thereb}^ placing their owners on the Roll of Honor ; thirteen are 
incomplete, or otherwise unsatisfactory. Two of the planters have 
failed to build; and two house lots are to us as undiscovered terri- 
tory. We find twenty-two families (including one widow) in which 
there are ninety-three children ; and one household is without 
children. There is one new home; and there are six planters who 
are not married men. To these must be added, in our thought of 
the inhabitants, the unknown number of persons who, in the 
natural course of town building, made themselves necessary to the 
young plantation, but whose presence never became a matter of 
permanent record. It is not unreasonable to suppose that Matta- 
tuck received some of the Indian captives — the residue of the war — 
and that they lived here during their term of servitude ; for the 
records of the colony are replete with indications that the early 
inhabitants utilized the labor of the " Indian " in many ways. 
Counting only the legalized inhabitants whom we can name we 
find one hundred and forty-five souls in Mattatuck in 168 1. 



CHAPTER XIII. 

A LETTER FROM FARMINGTON — DIRECTIONS REGARDING THE GREAT LOTS 

WAYS FOR PASSAGES THROUGH THE MEADOWS THE COMMITTEE 

MEETING OF 16S2 ITS CONDEMNATIONS AND FORFEITURES. 

'"T^HREE monthsafter the date of the preceding- cha^jter, Timothy 
J[ Standly and Abraham Andrus, as selectmen, wrote to the 
Committee for Mattatuck, asking advice. The date of the 
letter was February 20, 1681. It was near the time of the annual 
meeting when the letter was written. The committee waited six 
weeks before answering the questions. The inquiries may be 
inferred from the replies given. The inhabitants were permitted 
to choose from among the three great lots, the lot that should be 
for the minister's use, and were told that in case they could not 
agree among themselves, the committee would decide the matter. 
Another question had been asked in regard to the great lots, in 
reply to which, the committee wrote : " Our answer is, men at 
present to take up these lots do not appear to us. We are not 
forward to break them, hoping in time some of worth and useful- 
ness will appear, and for the present leave it in the hands and 
power of Sergt. Thomas Judd, Sergt. John Standly and 
Samuel Hikcox [to] let out the three great lots, and to break up 
two or three acres in each lot, and to defray all common charges." 
This reply indicates that the inhabitants had asked if the great lots 
could be divided so as to admit men who desired to become pro- 
prietors of small holdings in the township. It also reveals to us that 
the committee held ambitious hopes for Mattatuck ; hopes which 
they quietly veil behind the words " Some of worth and usefulness," 
when they might have written, "some of wealth and station; men 
fitted to rule a plantation." 

The answer to the second qtiestion is especially interesting, as 
it touches the subject of highways. "In reference unto ways to be 
laid out for passage through your meadow lands, our answer is, that 
we desire and appoint [the same committee] to lay out ways 
through sd meadows of twenty foot wide or more if they judge 
needful, for cart, horse, or oxen in yoke ; every man to hold the 
property of the land taken out of his and their allotments forever, 
only to be improved for the use afores'd of a passage, the pasturage 
to belong to him or them through whose lot the way shall be laid 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 



177 



out." '' Serg-.t " Thomas Jiidd, Isaac Bronson and Benjamin 
Judd had applied to the committee for guidance in reference to 
herding of cattle. The answer was : " We do order and appoint for 
the future that the inhabitants at a town-meeting, the major part 
of the inhabitants so met shall have full power to resolve and 
determine the way and method for herding", and to state what shall 
be charged for keeping of cows, and what shall be levied on dry 
cattle." This letter, announcing the result of the meeting, is signed 
by three members of the committee, John Talcott, John Wadsworth 
and Nicholas Olmstead. It was " Taken out of the original " by 
John Wadsworth. This is the first known meeting of the com- 
mittee that we have not in the " original." Without doubt, Major 
Talcott's many duties prevented him from sending this one to Mat- 
tatuck. 

February 6, 1682, the committee met again. The meeting Was 
held at Farmington, It was fraught with momentous consequences 
to certain proprietor inhabitants of Mattatuck. Fifteen months 
had passed since the time expired that had been appointed by the 
committee for the dwelling houses in Mattatuck to stand perfected. 
In the interval, an annual meeting had been held. Its permits, and. 
one order, we have just enumerated as contained in the letter sent 
to the selectmen. No hint has been given of condemnation or for- 
feiture. The inhabitants have been allowed to go on, living in and 
finishing their houses in apparent security, when suddenly the 
sword of justice descends upon them, and — wonder of wonders — it is 
wielded to the drop, through the agency of certain of the planters 
themselves. In view of the fact that the few men who came first 
and built first had made complaints to the committee because their 
old Farmington neighbors tarried in their homes, one would not 
naturally expect to find the saine men again raising their voices in 
complaint, when their neighbors and their brothers had arrived 
and were making their very hearts glad by their presence, simply 
because the same neighbors and brothers had been a little late in 
finishing their houses; but this is precisely what they did do. We 
meet here, among our own planters, one of the surprises that assail 
us at so many points in the life of the Puritan, aifording another 
proof that there was something in the men of that day that we 
have never quite understood — that we have never begun to under- 
stand — and the knowledge of this facts hould cause us to withhold our 
judgment in numberless instances. This not-understood soinethin<^, 
led our planters straight on in the path of law, which to them was 
the King's Highway of Duty, and valiantly they trod it, even when 
the journey took away the thing they had most earnestly sought for. 



1 78 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

Thus we find at the very opening of this meeting at Farmington, 
in February, 1682, the following statement from the committee: 
*' We having heard the complaints; and Alligations of Serg'. 
Thomas Judd, and Serg'. John Standly and other Friends sent 
from Mattatuck, as persons impowered to implead sundry of the 
proprietors there, for that they have not erected their dwelling 
Housen, and finished the same, according to provision and enj unc- 
tion by Articles concluded by the Committee for Mattatuck, 
November 26, 1679." We have no reason to think that it gave 
either John Standly or Thomas Judd any pleasure or profit to have 
their brothers dispossessed of their allotments, or to lose one-half 
of the householders, and yet they laid and pursued the plan for 
precisely that result. It was from these " complaints and alliga- 
tions " that we were able to draw the picture of Mattatuck in 1681. 
At the risk of being wearisome we will give them in their due form 
and order. As the committee listened to the story, Major Talcott 
made notes upon a piece of paper seven and one-half by eight 
inches. That piece of paper, yellow with age, crumpled and worn, 
was among the discovered documents so often alluded to ; and by 
its light we have been able to throw color and form into a region 
that seemed destitute of both. 

The first act of the committee at this meeting was to adjiidge 
and condemn all the granted allotments, formerly laid out to Ben- 
jamin Judd, Samuel Judd and Thomas Hancox, to be condemned as 
forfeited. 

Benjamin Judd was arraigned on two charges. The first charge 
was because he was not living with his family in Mattatuck on May 
30, 1680. The second was that his house was not finished on May 
30, 1 68 1. Testimony was offered that it was done in September of 
that year. Another aggravating circumstance was that Benjamin 
had "drawn oft from ye place." The temptations to linger long in 
Farmington must have been very great to most of the early settlers 
here. There, they had homes. There, family ties still held them. 
Their church relations continued there. Schools and comforts, 
unknown in Mattatuck, existed there. These things must have 
appealed strongly for sweet delays and long visits to men like Ben- 
jamin Judd, and to his wife, who was the daughter of Captain Will- 
iam Lewis, and to others. 

Samuel Judd had "not built according to time prefixed. He 
built and went into his House in November, :8i, and not fit 
before." Stephen Upson, the carpenter, testified that " it was 
shingled about Michaelmuss." Daniel Porter and Isaac Bronson 
testified. 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. lyg 

Thomas Hancox was the next culprit. Of him it was said: He 
''hath a House covered all most all and clabborded and noe chim- 
ne)', within the time stated." He had deserted the place, "being 
gone all or the greatest of the year past." 

It was agreed that the persons to whom the committee should 
thereafter grant the above allotments should " reside and dwell in 
Mattatuck the full term and time of four years in a steady way and 
manner with their families after subscription to the act and order." 
If the owners of the buildings on the condemned lands should 
refuse to sell them at a reasonable rate, or if the parties should fail 
to agree in the matter of purchase and sale, the new grantees were 
at liberty to build upon the land such mansion houses as the com- 
mittee required at the beginning. The same penalties for forfeiture 
were re-enacted for the new incumbents. The committee evidently 
made this condemnation and forfeiture of the allotted lands with 
genuine regret, for, almost in the same breath, certainly in the 
same sentence with the above conditions, we find the words: "And, 
in case those friends whose lands are at this meeting by us con- 
demned, do desire to be re-possessed of their present lands condemned 
as forfeited, [they] shall subscribe to this present act and order, in 
case we see reason to re-possess him of them." Under the above 
act, David Carpenter's formerly condemned lands were also to be 
admitted. 

The "friends sent from Mattatuck," also complained of "Timothy 
Standly, Joseph Gaylord, John Carrington, Abraham Andrews, 
Cooper, Thomas Nuel, Daniel Porter, Thomas Warner, Thomas 
Richison, Obediah Richards and JohnScovel," for their not building 
in time. Edmund or Edward Scott, Jr., was complained of at the 
same time; but his father came to the rescue, and he escaped. 
Benjamin Jones and John Newell were also the subject of com- 
plaint. To begin with the list, we find that Timothy Standly and 
Joseph Gaylord had each of them a house that was " Big enough, 
and ovned." [Ovened ?] 

John Carrington was complained of, because his house was not 
large enough. 

Abraham Andrus, the cooper, had not built a house on John Judd's 
house lot, which had been conferred upon him by the committee. 

Thomas Newell had failed to gain a residence in May, 1680, and 
his house was not finished in May, 1681, neither was it done when 
the complaints were made. 

Daniel Porter had built a house, but it had no chimney. 

Thomas Warner, whose father, John Warner, the old "Pequot 
warrior," had his cellar in readiness when he died, had failed to 



i8o HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

comply with the building regulations. The house was still unfin- 
ished. 

Thomas Richason, poor fellow, was living in a cellar, and even 
the cellar was not his own, for the record tells us that he "hired it to 
live in." 

Edmund Scott, Junr., had a house, but it was without a chimney. 
Obadiah Richards had not built his house according to the dimen- 
sions required by the committee. 

This paper of Major Talcott's bears evidence of the Major's 
weariness of white men's complaints, for the latter part of it runs 
along in this sleepy fashion: 

"Benjamin Joanes complayned of for neglect of cohabitation. 

John Nuel complayned of for ye same — 

John Scove no chinny — 

B: Scott conyslait — " 

The last word is not easy to decipher. It does not seem to be 
complaint, and it does not seem clear that Major Talcott intended 
to write "comes late." 

The committee exempted Benjamin Jones and John Newell from 
the ban of condemnation and forfeiture. To the other men, they 
gave an opportunity. They were to submit, to reform and live iipon 
the place one year longer than their neighbors, who had fulfilled 
conditions. This they were required to do, in order to become abso- 
lute owners of the soil. They all, with the exception of Benjamin 
and vSamuel Judd, availed themselves of the way of return. 

Benjamin Judd withdrew his services as public surveyor and 
returned to Farmington. Samuel Judd left his house, into which 
he had moved with his bride in November, 1681, and followed his 
father, Deacon Thomas Judd, to Northampton, where, in due time, 
he fell heir to the estate of his father's second wife. It is not 
known what became of their houses; but it seems probable that 
Samuel's house remained for the occupancy of his brother Philip, 
who came in 1687, and received from the committee his brother's 
allotments, and that Benjamin's house was occupied m 1683, by 
Thomas Judd, Jr., his nephew. Thomas Hancox, after fifteen 
months' delay, when the meadows were growing green again, 
thought them promising enough to pay him for subscribing anew 
and staying the additional year. 

Before this meeting ended, the committee agreed that all public 
charges, including those for making and mending highways, should 
be laid on the meadow allotments for two years, or until 1684. 
They also granted that each proprietor inhabitant should have 
eight acres laid out in such places as the inhabitants should agree 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. i8i 



upon, and they confirmed a grant of land, bestowed by the planters 
themselves, upon Samuel Hikcox. I think, but cannot prove, that 
this grant was bestowed upon Samuel Hikcox at this early date in 
recognition of his expenditures for a saw-mill. Philip Judd also, 
who died in 1689, after living here but two years, owned a " right of 
eleven pounds in the saw-mill and horse tackling." Six months 
before, on August 3, 1682, the inhabitants had held a meeting in 
the interest of Stephen Hopkins. Deacon Langton's allotments 
had returned to the committee, and at this meeting the inhabi- 
tants granted them to Stephen Hopkins, with the understanding 
or condition that one-half of the proprietorship should be entailed 
to the mill, in the same manner that the thirty acres had been. A 
copy of the record of this town meeting was prepared and sent over 
to the Assembly's Committee, that the act of the inhabitants might 
be ratified by the power that still governed the plantation. Among 
the early documents, we unfold this very copy that went from 
Mattatuck to Farmington in 1682, and was returned, with the acts 
of the committee, at an unknown date. There is upon it the words, 
^' transcribed on page 23 b." This indicates that Mattatuck Records 
at that date filled twenty-three pages. Samuel " Hickcox " signed 
his name, and John Warner made his mark on the copy; they being 
the townsmen in that year. At some time between the date of the 
town meeting— or more strictly speaking the proprietors' meeting, 
for as yet there was no town— and this meeting of the committee 
in February 1682, Stephen Hopkins must have resigned the care of 
the mill to his son John, for w^hen the committee at the meeting 
whose acts we are considering, ratify the act of the inhabitants con- 
cerning Deacon Langton's allotments, the name of " John Hopkins, 
the present miller," is substituted for that of his father Stephen. 
The last words of this meeting are given in the form of advice. 
" Serg'. John Stanly " had petitioned the committee to allow him to 
have four or five acres of meadow land up the river, even though he 
must go four or five miles away from the village to find it. The 
committee advise the inhabitants to comply with Sergeant Standly's 
request, "in consideration of the meanness of his allotments." 
This land grant was called Standly's Jericho and the name still lives 
in Jericho bridge, on the Naugatuck railroad. 

The acts of this meeting were not signed until the next day; the 
committee having taken time to duly consider all the evidence 
offered. There is nothing to throw light upon the case of 
" Edward " Scott, Junior. He had a house upon the lot that had 
been allotted to William Higginson, but it will be remembered that 
it had no chimney. On this day his father " Edward " Scott, Senior, 



1 82 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

appeared before the committee, and made a verbal deed of gift to 
his son of " that house set for a dwelling house on the home lot 
granted to his son by Mattatuck committee," and all his rights in 
the other grants received that belonged to the home lot on which 
the house then stood,together with all the charges and expenses there- 
on. This gift included what "he had disburst for the lands in refer- 
ence to the purchase thereof." This first deed of land in Mattatuck 
bearing date February 7, 1682, is recorded by Major Talcott upon 
the same paper that contains the records of this most important 
meeting. " John Talcott and John Wadsworth Assistants," sign 
the deed as witnesses. 

We are not able to account for the house on this lot without a 
chimney, and at the same time, another house on the same lot that 
met all the requirements of the committee, unless we assume that 
William Higginson had built a house on it, and that Edward, Sen- 
ior, had bought it, without the land. Similar transactions were 
frequent at this period. 

This is believed to be the last meeting held at Farmington by 
the Committee for Mattatuck, for upon the same paper and beneath 
the deed of Edmund vScott, John Wadsworth wrote the following 
formula for signatures : 

" We whose names are here under-written do subscribe to a 
faithful submission and observation of the act of the committee on 
the other side of this lefe February 6, 1682." Nearly four months 
passed away before a penitent approached to promise "submission" 
and "observation," and then we find appended the following list of 
four names with their dates of signature. 

Subscribed this 4 June 83 Thomas Hancox. 
Jan. 10 83 Thomas Judd. 
May 26= 84= Robert: Porter. 
June 13. 87 Philip Judd. 

In a little corner of space left on the paper in the deed of 
Edmund Scott to his son, and above the formula for signatures, 
John Wadsworth tucked in the explanation of Philip Judd's signa- 
ture in the following words: " We the committee grant Philip Judd 
the quiet possession of the land and allotments at Mattatuck that was 
formerly his Broth Samuel Judds lands this 13th of June 1687 pr us, 

John Talcott \ ^ ■,, ,, 

•' \- Lojiumttee. 

John Wadsworth 5 

Thomas Hancox was the only penitent. Thomas Judd was 
"accepted as an inhabitant at Mattatuck " on the day he signed the 
agreement. The foUowingf is the document: 



MATTATUCK AS A PLANTATION. 183 

" Hartford, Jan'y; the loth: 1683. 
Thomas Judd JuiV is accepted as an inhabitant at Mattatuck his father Thomas 
Judd having signified his desires of the same he the sayd Thomas Judd Jun"': sub- 
scribing to the Act and order of the Committee February the sixt 16S2. in reference 
to Benjamin Juds allotment, and privilidg of reseizen of the same upon condissions 
in the sayd Act and order granted. It being determined by us the Committee, in 
case any grant or grants be made by the inhabitants of Mattatuck to Thomas Judd 
Jun'': in reference to possession of any parcels or Tracts of Land is hereby made 
voyd and of none effect, notwithstanding any thing to the contrary. And whereas 
there is an Addission formerly granted by the Committee to Benjamin Judd's home 
Lott, it is now ordered that the sayd Addission shall not run further into the High- 
way [West Main street, about present State street] than it was layd by Serg' Jn" 
Stanley Thomas Judd, and the Townsmen appointed for that service. 

John Talcott I 

Pr us John Wadsworth I •,, ,, 

■;^ ^ V Coinmtiiee. 

NiCHO. Olmstead 

Samuell Snell Senr j 
This is the latest document that has been found containing the 
autographs of the surviving members of the committee. It sug- 
gests that Thomas Judd, Junior, had before that date received from 
the inhabitants, either with or without the sanction of the commit- 
tee, certain lands that he could no longer hold when invested with 
the allotments of his uncle, Benjamin Judd. 

Lieutenant Nicholas Olmstead died soon after he signed the 
acceptance of Thomas Judd, Junior, as a proprietor of Mattatuck. 
Lieutenant Samuel Steele, died in 1685, thus leaving but two mem- 
bers of the committee of five. Lieutenant Steele had more personal 
interest in our plantation than any other one of the number, for 
two of his sisters lived here, they having married the brothers 
William and Thomas Judd. Three children of Deacon Thomas 
Judd of Farmington, married three children of John Steele, of 
Farmington. As long as Mattatuck continued its plantation life, 
all the acts of the inhabitants that included the granting of 
lands, or the acceptance of proprietors, required the sanction of 
the committee; but after 1682, we find that gradually the inhabit- 
ants became more independent in their acts, because the committee 
more and more lessened its grasp upon affairs. In October, 1685, 
the Court "appointed Major Talcott and Mr. Wadsworth to con- 
tinue in full power as a committee for Mattatuck, as formerly, not- 
withstanding the decease of some other of the committee." 

Dec. 26, 1685, Major Talcott gave directions for raising rates for 
defraying public charges. There is in the writer's possession, a let- 
ter written by Mr. John Wadsworth to the selectmen of Waterbury, 
that is of interest in this connection. It is the last communication 
from a member of the committee. When folded in the creases made 
by the writer, the letter is about two and one-half by two inches. 



1 84 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

It still bears upon the red sealing-wax the impression cf the writer's 
seal, which is so broken that only the sections of an anchor can be 
identified. We give the letter. It speaks for itself as clearly as we 
could interpret its meaning. We do not follow the spelling or punc- 
tuation: 

" To the Select7ne7i of Water bury: 

Gentlemen: — When we had the last meeting at Farmington concerning your 
affairs, it was pleaded and owned by some of yourselves that there was a division 
of land laid out, wherein it was agreed by yourselves and the committee that laid it 
out that there should be an addition, namely, 5-4 for one acre; that is to say, [in] 
part of that division; but through forgetfulness or oversight it was omitted, and so 
the persons concerned fall short of what they should have had. This is therefore 
to request and desire you to accommodate those persons concerned with that which 
may be just on the fore-mentioned account, and, so as they may be suited as well 
as you can; for without doubt they will be losers by not having it together with 
fore said division — which is all at present from him who is 

Your assured friend and Servant, Jou.x Wadswortji. 

Postscript — Your " atendent" of the above said, shall be allowed by us the Com- 
mittee. 

Farmington, Sept. 9, 1687." 

The custom of "throwing in" land in the measurements of it 
was extensively practiced in our township. Hills were sometimes 
thrown in, and waste land not estimated. There is one instance of 
a land division wherein three roods of the best land was laid out for 
one acre and seven roods of the "worst" land for one acre. This 
arrangem.ent was entered into in order to equalize values, as Mr. 
Wadsworth explains. At last on the fifteenth of May, in the year 
1686, twelve years after the plantation was formed, the General 
Assembly was pleased to accept the plantation into Hartford County 
and to bestow upon it the name of " Wattcrbury." 

We have closely followed the government of the committee to 
the present date. Meanwhile, the inhabitants have carried on their 
own enterprises in the most enterprising manner. They have built 
their houses, constructed miles of common fence, built a corn-mill, 
and we'feel constrained to write, a saw-mill, although we can offer 
no evidence as to its site, unless the saw-mill near the corn-mill was 
the earliest one built. Already the lot for the minister's use is 
chosen and perhaps built upon. It may have been the presence of 
the minister in the plantation that caused the General Assembly to 
confer upon it acceptance into the Corporation of Connecticut. It 
is at points like the present one that we miss the sight of the 
twenty- three pages of Mattatuck Records, ungrateful for the 
moment, for all that is left to us. During the nine years that have 
passed since the close of King Philip's war, not one note of alarm, 
so far as we know, has been sounded in Mattatuck, that was caused 
by the word or act of a single "dusky child of Adam." 



CHAPTER XIV. 

FARMINGTON'S bounds DEEDS FROM TUNXIS INDIANS MATTATUCK 

LANDS CONVEYED TO THE PROPRIETORS BY INDIANS — BOUND LINE 

WITH DERBY BOUND LINE WITH WOODBURY A SUGGESTION THE 

THREE SISTERS DEATH OF KING CHARLES II. JAMES II. PRO- 
CLAIMED KING, AT HARTFORD THE CHARTER IN PERIL. 

AS in all her beg-innings Waterbury must go back to Farming- 
ton as the source of her life, so must we study the boundaries 
of that township and examine her Indian titles in order to 
establish clearly and definitely our own territory. The acts of the 
General Assembly and the acts of the Indian are so firmly inter- 
woven and adjusted to fit the web of civilization, that, if taken sep- 
arately, we lose the meaning of the design. Therefore, difficult as 
it may be to follow outlines, we make the attempt, resisting the 
temptation to give the interesting details that crowd close to one's 
pen and claim to be put upon record. 

When, in 1645, the bounds of Farmington were established, there 
seemed no necessity for a western boundary on its wilderness side, 
and no bound w^as appointed. Its eastern limit w^as five miles west 
from the Connecticut river. The Round hill, in the great meadow 
toward Masseco (Simsbury), was the point of measurement for its 
north and south bounds. Its south bound was five miles south 
from this hill, wdth the followdng very significant liberty : " They 
shall have liberty to improve ten miles further than the said five, ami to hinder 
others from the like, until the Court see fit otherwise to dispose ofi it." Here 
stands revealed the fact that Farmington had jurisdiction over all 
of the territory comprised within ancient Waterbury for twenty- 
two years, before any restriction whatever was placed upon her 
improvements by the court. 

We will try and learn how the "Governor and Company of the 
Colony of Connecticut " acquired the title under which the terri- 
tory could be granted to subjects. The honest men of Farmington 
answer this question for us. It was " taken for granted that the 
magistrates bought the whole country to the Mohaw^k's country of 
the chief sachem, Sequassen." After the three bounds of 1645 had 
been established, it became necessary to look up the title that had 
been obtained from the Indians, at the first settlement. About 1650 
there was a "discovery made, in writing, of such agreements as were 
[made] by the magistrates with the Indians of Tunckses concerning 
the lands, and such things in reference thereunto as tend to settle 



1 86 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

peace, in a way of truth and rig-hteousness. between the English 
and them." It is by this "discovery, in writing," that the above fact 
appears in relation to the supposed title. We repeat it. It was 
-'•taken for granted that the magistrates bought the whole country to 
the Mohawk's country of Sequassen, the chief sachem ! " The record 
goes on to narrate that "notwithstanding their interest by that 
means, yet that the magistrates did in a friendly manner come to 
terms with the Tunckses Indians that some English might come 
and live amongst them, which terms were these : That the Indians 
should yield up all the ground that they had under improvement at 
that time when the bargain was first made, and reserve ground in 
place together compassed about with a creek and trees, and now 
also to be staked out only in that piece. The English were to have 
the grass for their cows, which now they are willing to let go, also 
one little slip to be staked out, to avoid contention." There was 
also an agreement made, by which the English were to break up 
lands in the grounds that were, in time to come, to be used by the 
Indians. This bargain, or deed, seems to have been made with a 
full understanding on the part of the Indians; for John Stanton, 
the interpreter, was present, and is one of the witnessing signers; 
and the very language of it impresses one with the spirit of fair- 
ness evinced by the men of Farmington. The Indians are told in 
the plainest words, in this document, that "all the lands the Eng- 
lish have are of little worth until the wisdom, labor, and estate of 
the English are improved upon them, and that the magistrates, 
when they have land for a place, give it away to the English to 
labor upon, and take nothing for it." The advantages that the 
Indians were then enjoying through the presence and protection of 
white men are then very prettily pictured in words, after which 
the following promise is made by the chiefs of the tribe : 

"In this we, the chief Indians, in the name of all the rest, 
acknowledge; and we engage ourselves to make no quarrels about 
this matter." The Indians who signed this agreement were Pethus 
and Ahamo, said to be the son of Pethus. The marks or heraldic 
devices appended to this deed are notable; the first, because the 
signature is made with two separate marks, perhaps in imitation of 
English names; the second, or Ahamo's mark, is replete with a sig- 
nificance that merits consideration. It is an elaborate device, 
nearly two inches in height and more than an inch in width, show- 
ing care and intention on the part of the signer to express his 
meaning. The original deed forms a part of the volume of record. 
This deed, or agreement, was the second one, or rather it was a 
combination of the two agreements that had been made, one in 1640 
and the other in 1650. 



THE TOWNSHIP OF IGSG. 187 

In 1667, " the Court g-ranted unto Farmington to run their bounds 
from the Round hill to the southward ten miles, provided it did not 
prejudice any former grant to any town or particular person." It 
will be seen that by this grant, five miles of the ten that had for- 
merly been secured to Farmington for improvement, now came 
within her own proper bounds, leaving the five miles that she had 
had liberty to improve, entirely outside of her jurisdiction. In 1671, 
twenty-six years after she became a plantation, Farmington's west 
bound was established. It was to run ten miles west from Hartford 
bounds, or fifteen miles west from Connecticut river. Farmington 
in 1671 was anxious to have her western bound established. Was 
it not with direct reference to the possible plantation at Mattatuck? 
It is unreasonable to suppose that the men of Farmington remained 
in profound ignorance of the region in which, for nearly a genera- 
tion they had had liberty to improve the lands, or that the impetus 
toward a settlement was unfelt up to the time when legal steps 
were taken to that end. With this thought in view, we can under- 
stand how certain places were already nariied, when the legalized 
settlement of Mattatuck began, and understand why we are unable 
to account for the naming of Steele's brook and plain and meadow; 
of Bucks hill and Wooster swamp; of Mount Taylor, of John 
" Macy's " land and Golden's meadow. They are one and all sug- 
gestive of the days when Farmington had liberty to improve, and 
the General Court used all the inducements in its power to per- 
suade its subjects to raise commodities, for export. Could a better 
field have been found for Edward Wooster, the great hop-raiser of 
the region, than Wooster swamp ? 

Farmington seems to have been keenly alive to her landed inter- 
ests at about the time the settlement at Mattatuck was in the 
thoughts of her sons, for in 1672 she secured along her entire west- 
ern border an additional mile of territory, and even Wallingford, 
apparently in dread of too near a neighbor on her western side, 
petitioned for and secured two miles of additional territory on her 
western border. The grant to Farmington pushed Mattatuck a mile 
to the westward. 

But the Indians of Farmington had never conveyed the lands 
extending ten miles to the southward of the Round hill, and ten 
miles to \he westward from Hartford's west bound, and now the 
court had added the eleventh mile ! A new agreement was entered 
into on May 22, 1673, in order to cover the above territory. This 
argeement recognized the deed, or treaty of 1650, between Pethus and 
Ahamo, and the English,but explained that in course of time, dissatis- 
faction had "been growing amongst the Indians in reference to the 
premises, on which account the town of Farmington gave them a 



1 38 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

meeting by a committee." How could it have been otherwise, when 
the court was, without authority, giving- away their lands, and 
Farmington was receiving them, without making payment for them? 
However, at this meeting both parties came to a friendly and final 
conclusion, based upon the court's present lay out of lands. For all 
the miles of territory they gave up, the Indians received two hun- 
dred acres of upland within the bounds of the plantation, and three 
pounds in other pay. Upon this deed, also the original document, 
there is traced an outline of the Round hill, which is nearly a cir- 
cle, on the interior of which is written, "ye round hill — Wepansock 
ye Indian name." From the circumference of the hill, lines are 
drawn to the cardinal points, with the distance from the hill given 
on each line. Twenty-six Indians were present at the signing of 
this deed, and made their marks upon it. The territory covers 
fifteen miles from north to south, and eleven from east to west. 

It was not until May i8th, 1674, just nineteen days before the 
signing of the Articles of Agreement for the Settling of Mattatuck, 
that Farmington's southern and western bounds were measured and 
laid out and retiirned to the court. The south bound reached a 
tree on the west side of a swamp under the Hanging hill, near the 
south end of the hill. The tree was marked with initials, and the 
date, May 7, 1672. It is with interest that we note the western 
bound of P'armington, for it indicates the existence of a recog- 
nized, and, without doubt, habited place, farm or farms, before the 
plantation was organized. James Steele, the surveyor, makes the 
return to the court, as follows: "Farther, I being appoynted to 
measure the bredth of Farmington bownds from Hartford bownds 
westward, have accordingly measiired out eleven miles towards Mat- 
tatuck to a white oak tree marked with divers letters and figures, as 
S: S: [vSamuel Steele] I: S. [James Steele] F: B., I: W. I: R., May 7: 
'73. with divers other trees marked in the sayd line." 

That Mattatuck was not at that date, simply a territorial region 
to which the name was applied, and that there was soiiiet/n?ig beyond 
this western bound of Farmington, which, when reached was 
the Mattatuck, towards which James wSteele measured is certainly dis- 
closed by the words chosen to describe the western bound of Far- 
mington. 

August 26, 1674, fourteen Indians (six of whom signed the deed 
covering the court's extension of Farmington lands the year before), 
conveyed to the committee " one parcel of land at Mattatuck, 
situate on each side of Mattatuck River; being ten miles in length 
north and south and six miles in breadth." The eastern bound of 
this tract of land was upon Farmington. In 1677, the committee 
conveyed this sixty square miles to the thirty-one proprietors of 



THE TOWNSHIP OF IGSn. 189 

Mattattick, they having paid the purchase price thereof. It must 
be kept in mind, that, as yet, the Colony of Connecticut had con- 
firmed no right in the soil to the planters. It simply held jurisdic- 
tion over the territory, and only quitclaimed its interest in lands, 
when the inhabitants had secured title to them from the aboriginal 
owners. Thus, we get a glimpse of the value to the settlers of the 
"uncouth " marks of the native potentates, and no longer marvel at 
the efforts made by the planters to secure an enlarged township by 
bargaining with the tribes for land to the north, south, east and 
west, of the sixty scpiare miles of 1674. It must be kept in mind 
that the colony had m 1640, simply "taken for granted" that it pur- 
chased of vSecjuassen all the lands to the Mohawk country — but it 
soon fell back from that untenable assumption, and required would- 
be proprietors to buy their own lands. Meanwhile, it was decided 
to look ahead, and determine what might be suitable lines of divi- 
sion between town and town. Accordingly on May 18, 1675, a com- 
mittee was appointed to view the lands and the distances between 
Derby, Woodbury, Mattatuck, Pototock (Southbury) and Wyante- 
nuck, and to consider what might be suitable bounds for each town. 
Three years passed by, accompanied by King Philip's war, without 
a return to the court from this committee. During this interval, 
Mattatuck had awaited development; the inhabitants of Woodbury 
had entered into retreat at Stratford and perhaps, like our own peo- 
ple, they returned to their old love with renewed affection, for the 
town of Woodbury found it necessary to appeal to the court to 
make an order that might enforce the people who had taken up lots 
to return and inhabit there. The court made the order, which was 
very compelling and armed with penalties. Because of these things, 
the bounds had been neglected. 

In 1678, the boundary committee appointed in 1675, was called 
upon to report, but failed to do duty, and in October, 1679, was 
again called upon to report in May 16S0; and it was ordered that 
"no farm be laid out within eight miles of either of those places, 
until return had been made." In May, 1680, the four men, Wm. 
Judd, Edward Worcester [Wooster], Lieut. Joseph Judson, and Mr. 
John Banks, pro\dng still delinquent, a new committee was 
appointed "to view and measure the distances between Derby, 
Woodbury and Mattatuck and consider what might be suitable 
bounds for each plantation." 

It is evident that Derby and Mattatuck had become weary with 
waiting for the court's committee to act, for on the last day of 
April, 1680, the respective towns had appointed a committee to act 
in determining a line between the settlements, and had given their 
agents full power "to make a final issue of the matter before it 



I go HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

should come to the Court." And so it happened that three days 
after the appointment of the court's new committee, Derby and 
Mattatuck appeared, on May i8, 1680, before that tribunal with the 
following as their agreement concerning Mattatuck's south and 
Derby's north bound line. Twelve -Mile hill has long been a recog- 
nized landmark. It was given its name, and the twelve-mile stake 
was placed upon it, to indicate that Derby's north bound was twelve 
miles from Milford's north bound. The name and the stake carry 
the date back to the 3'ear 167 1, when Derby was not even a planta- 
tion, but the home of a few settlers who were ambitious to be 
recognized and owned by the colony. To-day, Twelve-Mile hill is 
called Andrews hill. It lies to the west of Naugatuck, and has an 
interesting and eventful history of its own. 

The following is the agreement between Derby and Mattatuck 
that was sanctioned by the court on May 18, 1680: 

" The sowth bounds of Mattatock doe begin at a stake at Derby's 
Twelve Mile end, and from that stake to extend a west line where 
Derbv and Mattatuck shall meet Woodbury bounds, and from that 
stake aforesaid at the end of Derby Twelve Miles, to goe w"' a 
straight line to a stone marked w'^'^ M on the north side, and D on 
the south side, lyeing on the west side of Nagatuck or Mattatuck 
river, and from that stone* to the mouth of Beacon Hill brook 
where it falls into the Nagatuck or Mattatuck river, and that 
brook to be the dividing line eastward between Mattatuck and 
Derby." Thus the first boundary line of the township was estab- 
lished before town rights were bestowed, and without the interven- 
tion of the court, and to the evident satisfaction of both parties. 

The precedent seemed a good one for Mattatuck and Woodbury 
to follow. Accordingly, on June 29, 1680, William and Thomas 
]udd and John vStandly, Jimior, for Mattatuck — John Minor, Joseph 
Judson and Israel Curtice for Woodbury, had a meeting and iinani- 
mously agreed upon the following boundary : 

"That there be a line run, due east from the westernmost part 
of the bounds agreed and concluded between Mattatuck and Derby, 
to Mattatuck river, and so that line to be run from the sayd river 
two miles and twelve score rodd due west, and then a line runn 
from the eastermost part of the great pond comonly known by the 
name Quassapauge, from such a part of the pond as by us allready 
is agreed on, fowerscore rods due east, and then a straight line 
from that fourescore rod to the aforesaid west corner between 
Derby and Mattatuck, and from the aforesaid corner fouerscore rod 
due east from the pond." The bounds were to run from the given 

+ It is thought that the marked stone referred to was lost or destroyed about 1849, in the construction of 
the Naugatuck railroad. 



THE TOWNSHIP OF 1680 



191 



points due north to the northward extent of each plantation's 
bound. May 18, 1681, the General Court "confirmed and rattified 
the boundaries agreed upon between Mattatuck and Woodbury and 
g-ranted that Mattatuck plantation should run eight miles north 
from the town plott;" and also that Mattatuck's bounds on the east 
should be upon Farmington's bounds. The north bound of Wood- 
bury was not established until two years later; it was to run eight 
miles north from the north bounds of Derby. 

Lieutenant John Standly and John Norton were "to lay out 
Mattatuck bounds." That very day, May 19, 1681, our John Standly 
had been confirmed lieutenant of the "traine band of Farmington," 
of which organization his father, John Standly, had been for sev- 
eral years the captain. Accordingly the court gave to him his new 
title when, a few hours later, they placed him upon the committee 
to lay out our bounds. What a temptation it must have been to stay 
in Farmington, with the added glory of being a lieutenant there ! 
If anything could have won him from allegiance to the new planta- 
tion, surely this temptation offered by his townsmen, would have 
accomplished its purpose; but he laid his military title down and 
became plain John vStandly of Mattatuck. On several committees 
that were made in reference to local matters, he was afterward 
called Lieutenant Standly. Although the committee had been 
appointed in 16S1, and had duly attended the commission, the court 
did not accept and ratify the return. Possibly it awaited the time 
when the proprietors should have acquired title to the entire terri- 
tory within its allotted area. In the year 1684, three deeds were 
obtained from its Indian owners. April 29, 1684, nine Indians, for 
nine pounds, conveyed a section of land, as an addition to the tract 
conveyed in 1674. It was on its north side, and extended eight miles 
north from Mount Taylor. On an east and west line its extent was 
eight miles. At a point on this eight-mile northern line of the 
township, Standly and Norton marked a certain tree with their 
initials. This tree, in time, became lost, and the loss of it led to 
complications which proved a loss of territory to Waterbury; but 
we must wait forty years for the coming of that event. 

December 2, 1684, ten Indians, for nine pounds, conveyed "one 
parcel of land at Mattatuck situate on [the] east side of Nagatuck 
or Mattatuck river, to extend three miles westward from the afore- 
sayd river— three miles toward Woodbur}', butting upon the rock 
called Mount Tayler; an east line to be run from thence to Farm- 
ington bounds, [and] a west line from the fore-mentioned rock, this 
to be the butment north— butting east on- Farmington bounds, and 
from the great rock called the ordinary at the west of Farmington 
bounds upon a south line to Beacon Hill brook or Milford or New 



192 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Haven bounds, butting south upon Beacon Hill brook and Pauga- 
suck bounds — west upon Pototuck and Pomeraug. This parcel of 
land being [and] laying within the township of Mattatuck bounded 
as afore prescribed." 

February 20, 1684, twelve Indians, for six pounds, conveyed 
twenty parcels of land; nine on the east and eleven on the west 
side of the Naugatuck river. On the east side, the nine parcels 
with attractive Indian names lay between the mouth of Beacon Hill 
brook and Fulling Mill brook (at Union City), while the eleven par- 
cels on the west side seem to have extended from the first men- 
tioned brook to Cedar swamp, on the north side of Quassapaug 
pond. This deed is replete with points of interest. It presents to our 
notice the ver}" unusual fact that twelve Indians conveyed nine par- 
cels of land, each parcel bearing its own descriptive name (its sig- 
nificance unknown to us), and the nine parcels circumscribed in 
area by two tributaries of the Naugatuck river, which are, possibly, 
not more than two miles asunder, and this in a region popularly 
supposed to have contained no "town of Indians." We here pre- 
















t*f~ I 






THE INDIAN DEED OF FEBRUARY 20, 16S4. 



THE TO Wl^SHIP OF 16S6. 



193 



sent this unique deed. The reproduction is a little less than one- 
third of the size of the orig-inal. 

A timid suggestion may perhaps be allowed to enter here, in 
view of the above deed and other facts that have come to the notice 
of the writer. It will be remembered that the small-pox raged so 
extensively about 1634 that the Indian tribes as far to the westward 
of the Connecticut river "as could be heard of," were almost depop- 
ulated by that disease. In view of that fact, we can readily under- 
stand how once populous "towns of Indians" came to be broken up 
and deserted. The suggestion is, that the twelve signers of the 
deed of February, 16S4, were the representatives of a tribe whose 
tribal name was the " Nagantucks," and that it had a "town" at 
some point between the tw^o brooks; a town which had been given 
up at a date prior to the conveyance of the lands to the men of Mat- 
tatuck. In that region there was very early (certainly before Mat- 
tatuck was settled), a place called "The Deer's Delight." Can one 
imagine a more fitting deer park than the region lying between the 
entrance of Beacon Hill brook into the river and present Seymour, 
or a finer place for an Indian village than the vicinity of that brook 
at the straits of the river? In 1672, Nagantucks was recognized as a 
place or locality. It was associated (in the bounds of New Haven 
or Milford, perhaps both), directly with "the rock called the 
Beacon, lying upon the upper end of the hill called Beacon Hill, and 
with the three chestnut trees growing from one root, being on the 
next hill, called the Reare Hill." Wc here present the said three 
chestnut trees of 1672. They 
were still growing from one root 
in 1 89 1. The town charter of 
New Haven described the north- 
west corner of that township as 
marked by the same three chest- 
nut trees growing from one root, 
in which patent they are called 
the Three Sisters. These trees 
became the boundary corner of 
the towns of Waterbury, Wal- 
lingford and New Haven, and 
also one corner of a bound be- 
tween Waterbury and Milford. 
They were sometimes called the 
Three Brothers. This clump of 
trees seems never to have been 
cut, but to have been left to 





THE THREE SISTERS, ALIAS THE THREE BROTHERS. 



13 



194 



niSTOEY OF WATERBURY. 



stand until nature laid it to rest and appointed its heirs. At 
the present time, three large, ancient looking- chestnut trees remain 
at the place and constitute the corner bounds of Naugatuck, Beth- 
any and Prospect. 

It may be noticed that Mattatuck's north bound was to run 
^' eight miles north from the to7V7t plot," which gave to that planta- 
tion about five miles of wilderness north of the north bound of 
Woodbury, whose north line was to run eight miles north from t/ie 
north line of Derby. 

Just four days after the inen of Mattatuck, in little Connecticut 
Colony, obtained from the Indians the last of the deeds of 1684, there 
was sent forth from the '"Councill Chamber in Whitehall" to the 
" Principal Officers and Inhabitants of Connecticut," the announce- 
ment of the death of King Charles II., which event occurred on 
that very day; and on the same day the proclamation of his onl}- 
brother and heir as King James II., was likewise announced to Con- 
necticut. Directions were sent out, and the form for the same was 
enclosed, that similar proclamations might be made in the chief 
towns. All men in office here were to continue in office until the 
pleasure of the new king should be made known. James II. was 
duly proclaimed at Hartford, April 19, 1685, about two of the clock, 
with great solemnity and affection, and then Robert Treat, of Mil- 
ford, Governor, — he who but two months before was receiving the 
Indians to witness the marks they signed on Mattatuck's deed — by 
order of the Council, did address the new King in due form, giving 
assurance that "his proclamation as King of Great Britain, Ireland 
and France had been duly made with acclamations of joy and affec- 
■tion, properly accompanied with petitions to the King of Kings for 
the long life and happy reign of his Majesty." Then, having done 
his duty by the king, he, the same day, prepared an address, in 
which he besought his most "Excellent Majestic to grant the 
benign shines of his favour to the poor Colony of Connecticut in 
the continuance of the liberties and properties granted by their 
late sovereign, Charles the Second, of blessed memory, that they 
might be encouraged in their small beginnings and live under his 
royal shadow a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and hon- 
esty." The address closed with due protestation of loyalty, duty 
and obedience. 

But we must turn away from the response of King James II. — 
from all the arts and wiles of his would-be "Counsellors," and the 
efforts that were made to dissolve the colonial system — and simply 
announce that, before Mattatuck became a town, Connecticut colony 
had every reason to apprehend the loss of its charter. For twenty- 



THE TOWNSHIP OF IGSn. i^^ 

three years it had rejoiced in its possession and experienced all the 
blessings of its kino-l}- protection. The men who received it were 
yet alive. They had in memory the ninth of October, 1662, the day 
on which it was "publiquely read in audience of ye freemen, at 
Hartford, and declared to belong to them." They had heard the 
oath administered to "Mr. Willys, to Captain John Talcott, and to 
Lieut. John Allyn;" the solemn oath to take into their custody the 
priceless three sheep-skins, and safely to keep them. To the same 
men they had seen Governor John Winthrop deliver the "Duplicate 
of that charter," in 1663. They had paid their full share of corn for 
that costly luxury; paid it in two-thirds wheat and one-third pease 
—dry and merchantable. Their persons and carts, their boats and 
canoes had been hired or pressed into service "to carry and trans- 
port" the corn from the towns to the vessels that bore the grain to 
New London. They had felt all the glad elation that came, when 
from Long Island and from the farthest western bounds, even to 
the very borders of the Hudson's river, the towns one after another 
came up. by deputy or petition, to be taken under the protection of 
that charter. Then the freemen had kept a Thanksgiving, 
appointed because of the success of their " Honored Governor in 
obtaining the Charter of his Majestie, their Sovereign," and for the 
free trade that had been ordered in all places in the colony. Now, 
a day of public humiliation was appointed, to lament "the sin of 
their great unreformedness under the uplifting of God's hand 
against them." In the election sermon it was declared that He had 
"smitten them in all the labers of their hands, by blastings, 
mildews, catterpillars, worms, tares, floods and droughts." 

In 1686, just as the inhabitants of Mattatuck were waiting for 
the crown of all their labors— acceptance into the corporation, as a 
town entitled to send its deputies to the assembly — the priceless 
charter was in peril. 

The freemen of Connecticut were aroused ! Man}* miles of terri- 
tory, rich in mystery and replete with possibilities, lay to the north- 
ward and westward of the settled townships. The charter gave 
authority to " The Governor and Company of the Colon}" of Con- 
necticut " to bestow these lands upon the colonists; but there was 
no time for the organization and settlement of new towns. The 
General Assembly resolved to enlarge the River Towns. To Hart- 
ford and Windsor was given all the region lying between Wood- 
bury and Mattatuck, and the Massachusetts line on the north; and 
between Farmington and wSimsbury, and the Housatonic river on the 
west. It gave to other townships other lands. It bestowed hun- 
dreds of acres upon individual men, for reasons that were not stated 
of record. 



196 HI820RT OF WATEIiBURY. 

To properly equip the little Ship of wState to outride the 
approaching onset, it anchored each town within its jurisdiction 
fast to the precious charter, by a " pattent " chain. The pattern, 
after which each chain was to be wrought, was prepared. It was in 
readiness in court on May 14, 1685; the day on which the towns 
were ordered to take out, each one, its own little charter. Matta- 
tuck had never sent a deputy to the Assembly at Hartford in 1685, 
and therefore, in all probability, did not petition for a charter at 
the date given in the instrument as May 14, 1685, but merely fol- 
lowed, when she did petition, the formula that was provided at that 
time. If the above date be accepted as the true one, then Water- 
bury and Lyme were the earliest petitioners for charters, and the 
patent must have been sought by ATattatuck. Mattatuck's last 
appearance in public, by name, was May 19, 1686, and the date of 
the granting of Waterbiiry s charter was the following February. 

A glance at a copy of Waterbury's patent of 1686, under the 
light of the following facts, will convince the observer that it was 
not a valid charter. The patents, or charters, were " to be signed 
by the governor, and by the secretary, in the name and by order of 
the General Court of Connecticut." The month after they were 
thus signed, it was ordered that they be sent back to Hartford, that 
they might receive the legal title of "Authority." They were then 
to be signed by " The Governor and Company of the Colony of Con- 
necticut." Waterbury's charter of 1686, as copied for Bronson's His- 
tory, bears the following signature only: 

" Pr order of the General court of Connecticut. 

John Allyn, vSecret'y." 




''Mli'l''l«!:illl'li!iiliil'|il|iHi 



IE 

i!il'iiiii;pi 




HOUSK OF CHARLES D. K'INGSUUKV, 



WHICH THE KAKLY RECOIUJS WERE FOCND. 



THE TOWNSHIP OF IGSG. 197 

■ We give the charter of that date, accompanied by a view of the 

lands included within it. The circular map of the township was 

sketched from the summit of Malmalick, one of the finest of the 

lofty, round hills, for which the region is noted. It lies south-west 

of Town Plot. From its summit the entire range of the township 

can be seen. 

waterbury's patent of 16S6. 

Whereas the General! Court of Connecticut have formerly Granted unto the 
inhabitants of Waterbury all those lands within these abutments viz. upon New 
Haven in part & Milford in part & Derby in part on the south & upon Wood- 
bury in part & upon the comons in part on the west & upon comon land on the 
North : & east in part upon Farmington Bounds & in part upon the comons «& 
from the South to the north line extends Thirteen Miles in length & from Farm- 
ington bounds to Woodbury about nine Miles breadth at the North & somewhat 
less at the South end, the sayd lands having been by purchase or otherwise law- 
fully obtayned of the native proprietors. And whereas the proprietor Inhabitants 
of Waterbury in the colony of Connecticut in Newengland have made application 
to the Governor & company of the sayd colony of Connecticut assembled in Court 
the fourteenth of May one Thousand Six Hundred & Eighty-five that they may have 
a patent for the confirmation of the afoarsayd lands as it is Butted & Bounded 
afoarsayd unto the present proprietors of the sayd Township of Waterbury which 
they have for some years past enjoyed without Interruption. Now for more full 
confirmation of the premises & afoarsayd Tract of land as it is butted and Bounded 
afoarsayd unto the present proprietors of the Township of Waterbury Know yee 
that the sayd Gov & company assembled in Generall Court according to the 
commission granted to them by our late Soveraign Lord King Charles the 
Second of the blessed Memory in his letters patent bearing date the Three 
& Twentyeth day of April in the fourteenth year of his Sayd Ma'"^^^ Reigne 
have given and Granted & by these presents doe give grant rattify & confirm 
unto Thomas Judd, John Standly, Robert Porter, Edmund Scott, Isaac Brun- 
son, John Wilton & the rest of the proprieters Inhabitants of the Towne of Water- 
bury & their heirs & assigns forever & to each of them in such proportion as 
they have already agreed upon for the division of the Same all that afoarsayd 
Tract of land as it is butted & Bounded together with all the woods uplands 
arable lande meadows pastures ponds waters Rivers fishings foulings mines 
Mineralls Quarries & precious Stones upon and within the sayd Tract of 
lands with~all other profits and commodities thereunto belonging or in any 
wise appertaining & we doe also Grant unto the aforenamed Thomas Judd, 
John Standly, Robert Porter, Edmund Scott, Isaac Brunson, John Wilton 
& the rest of the p'sent proprietors Inhabitants of AVaterbury their heirs and 
assigns forever, that the foresayd Tracts of land shall be forever hereafter deemed 
reputed & be an Intire Township of it Selfe to have & to hold the sayd Tract 
of lands & premises with all & Singular their appurtenances together with the 
priviledges, Immunities & franchises herein given and granted to the sayd 
Thomas Judd, John Stanly, Robert Porter, Edmund Scott, Isaac Brunson, John 
Wilton & others the present proprietor Inhabitants of Waterbury their heirs 
assigns & to the only proper use and behoof e of the sayd Thomas Judd, John 
Standly, Robert Porter, Edmund Scott, Isaac Brunson, John Wilton & the other 
proprietors Inhabitants of Waterbury their heirs & assigns forever according to 
the Tennore of his Ma"" Manar of East Greenwich in the County Kent in the 



198 



lirSTOliY OF WATEEBURY 



w 




^. (iJ9cufMttl 



WATERBURV TOWNSHIP OF IPC 



THE TOWNSHIP OF ICSG^ 



199 




VIEW FROM MALMAI.ICIC HILL. 



200 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

Kingdom of England in fee & common soccage & not in capitee nor Knight 
service they yielding & paying therefore to our vSoverigne Lord the King his heirs 
&i successors onely the fifth part of all the oare of Gold & Silver which from 
time to time & at all times hereafter shall be there gotten had or obtained in Lue of 
•all rents services dutys & demands whatsoever according to the charter in wit- 
ness we have hereunto affixed the Seal of the Colony this eighth of febuary in the 
Third year of the reign of s'' Soveraigne lord James the Second by the grace of 
■God of England, Scotland, france «& Ireland King defender of the faythe of o'' 
Lord 1 686: 

Pr order of the General Court of Connecticut, 

John Allyn, Secret'y- 

That the proprietors of Waterbnry discovered that they held no 
legal title to their township, appears in the very words of their 
petition for a new one. In 1720, they ask that a " deed of release 
and quitclaim of and in the lands within the town may be granted, 
and be signed and sealed by the Honorable the Goveriwr and the Sec- 
retary." 

The omission on the part of the governor to sign Waterbtiry's 
Charter, was but a sign of the times. The colony was in a state 
of excitement and alarm. Sir Edmond Andros was daily expected 
to arrive, and to usurp the government. Waterbury had no repre- 
sentative at Hartford to look after her interests and it is highly 
probable that the town's patent, unsigned by the governor, and 
unsealed, was still at Hartford on June 15, 1687, when " vSundry of 
the court, desiring that the Patent or Charter [of the colony] might 
be brought into Court, the secretary sent for it, and informed the 
Governo'' and Court that he had the Charter, and showed it to the 
Court: and the Govern©'' bid him put it into the box againe and lay 
it on the table, and leave the key in the box, which he did forth- 
with." This is all that relates to the story of the Colony's Char- 
ter that is on record. 

Dr. Benjamin Trumbull, Gershom Bulkley, and tradition, give to 
us the Charter Oak, and the rest of the interesting story from the 
time when the box containing the charter was left upon the table 
with the key in the lock. It must have been a dark day in June, 
when lights were required in the court room; or an evening ses- 
sion must have been held — it is difficult to contend with traditions, 
even that of the Charter Oak — so dear to Connecticut. The charter 
itself still proclaims by its presence in the vState Capitol, that it was 
never given up. 

On the 13th of the October following, Sir Edmund Andros, in 
the name of King James II. took the government of the colony into 
his own hands. Under the advice of unwise counselors, the king 
had planned to revoke the charters of Massachusetts Bay, Plymouth, 



THE TOWNSHIP OF IGSG. 201 

Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, and Connecticut Colony, 
and to consolidate them under one g'overnment. The Province of 
Maryland, and the Proprieties of East and West Jersey and of Dela- 
ware were to be united with the Province of New York. Edward 
Randolph had been for some time in possession of five writs of Quo 
Warranto, with summons from the sheriffs of London, summoning 
the Colony of Connecticut, with other colonies, to appear before the 
English Court, and show by what authority the Governor and com- 
pany held power. Certain articles of misdemeanor had been drawn 
up against "Authority " in Connecticut, as early as July 15, 1685. It 
will be seen that the General Assembly was not too early in getting 
ready for the expected disaster. Accusations were brought against 
the colony for promulgating and enforcing nine acts and laws, a 
number of which were declared to be contrary to the law of Eng- 
land. We cite one only. It was distinctly charged that the inhabi- 
tants were denied the " exercise of the religion of the church of 
England." A diligent search of the acts of the General Court, and 
of the code of laws fails to find any proof of such denial. This 
accusation was based upon the following law: 

"It is ordered, that where the ministry of the Word is established throughout 
this colony every person shall duly resort and attend thereunto respectively upon the 
Lord's Day, and upon such Fast Days and days of Thanksgiving as are to be gen- 
erally kept by the appointment of authority. And if any person within this Juris- 
diction, without necessary cause, withdraw himself from hearing the public minis- 
try of the word, he shall forfeit J^r his absence from every such meeting, five shil- 
lings." 

That the accusation was without foundation appears by an act 
made by the Connecticut legislators in 1669, and, so far as we have 
found, never revoked; showing, most conclusively, that the cere- 
monial rites of the Church of England were not denied to the in- 
habitants by any law made or existing after May 13, 1669. 

" This Court having seriously considered the great divisions that arise amongst 
■us about matters of Church Government; for the honor of God, welfare of the 
Churches and presevation of the public peace so greatly hazarded, do declare that 
whereas the Congregational Churches in these parts for the generale of their pro- 
fession and practice have hitherto been approved, we can do no less than still 
approve and countenance the same to be without disturbance until better light in 
an orderly way doth appear; but yet forasmuch as sundry persons of worth for 
prudence and piety amongst us are otherwise persuaded (whose welfare and peace- 
able sattisfaction we desire to accommodate) this Court doth declare that all such 
persons being also approved according to law as orthodox and sound in the funda- 
mentalls of Christian religion, may have allowance of their perswasion and profes- 
sion in Church wayes, or assemblies, without disturbance." 

vSir Edmund Andros took possession of the Government in Octo- 
ber of 1687. James II. abdicated his crown fourteen months later. 



202 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Dec. II, 1(^88. On February thirteenth, in the same year, King Will- 
iam III. and Queen Mary assumed his discarded inheritance. Will- 
iam and ]\Iary had been on the throne less than three months, when 
Sir Edmund Andros having- departed, the General Court of Connec- 
ticut was again convened. The date was May 9, 1689, and that was 
the thrilling session, at which Waterbury, for the first time in her 
history sent a deputy to represent her interests. " Ensign Thomas 
Judd for Waterbury," is the magical sentence found in the records 
of that court which tells us that Waterbury, after having served 
fifteen years as a minor, took her place in 1689 (under the reign of 
William and Mary) as a unit in the political life of the colony. 

Major Talcott did not live to see the plantation, for which he 
had done such excellent service throughout the period of its youth, 
celebrate its majority. He died after a most active, eventful, 
honored and useful life, in July of 1688. A singular independence 
in thought and act characterized this Puritan. Secretary Allen in 
writing to Governor Andros three months after that gentleman took 
his place as '' Governor in Chiefe of his Ma"''* Territories in New 
England," wrote of Major Talcott, that he was " one who loves to 
act his matters by himself." Of Sir Edmund Andros, one may be 
permitted in parting with him to write, that he performed unpleas- 
ant obligations to his sovereign, with the least possible friction to 
the colonists. 

We find many "snap shots " taken of him both by professional 
and amateur historians, that utterly fail to give likeness to his life 
and character. His treatment of the Indians and his care for their 
welfare, is extremely winning. He constantly urged that the peo- 
ple should everywhere " faile not to have regard to ye Indians as 
their own people." If he tasted the sweets of power in America, he 
also drank the cup of sorrow, for but three months after he began 
to rule, his wife. Lady Andros, died at Boston. As a picture of 
burial rites in 1687, we give an extract from the Diary of Judge 
Sewell, relating to her funeral : " Between 7 and 8 lychns [links] 
illuminating the cloudy air, the corpse was carried into the hearse 
drawn by six horses, the soldiers making a guard from the govern- 
ors house down the prison lane to the South meeting house; there 
taken out and carried in at the western door and set in the alley 
before the pulpit with six mourning women by it. House made 
lieht with candles and torches." 



CHAPTER XV. 

THE RELATION OF EACH INIAN'S PROPRIETY TO THE PURCHASE OF THE 
TOWNSHIP — LAND GRANTS THE LOTTERY MEADOW ALLOTMENTS 

— MINISTRY LANDS — THE THREE-ACRE LOTS THE MINISTER'S LOT 

— MR. FRAYSOR REVEREND JEREMIAH PECK INVITED TO P.ECOME 

THE SETTLED PASTOR IN WATERBURY — IHE MINISTER'S HOUSE 

THE SCHOOL-MASTER — THE "GREAT SICKNESS " OF 1689 — THE 

DEATH OF ROPERT PORTER AND PHILIP JUDD THE BURYING 

YARD — WATERBURY'S FIRST LIEUTENANT, COxMMISSIONERS, AND TAX 
LIST. 

FROM 1677 to 1689, Waterbur}^ made excellent progress in all 
the lines of her development. Neither death nor disaster, so 
far as we may know, attended her growth to that date. It is 
true that she had lost, by removal, two of her proprietors, Joseph 
Hickox and Thomas Hancox; but Robert and Richard Porter had 
been added to the number. During this period of twelve years 
much had been accomplished; the inhabitants had proceeded with 
their various industries without, so far as we can learn, taking 
thought of fear concerning their Indian neighbors. They had made 
definite and apparently satisfactory agreements with their prede- 
cessors in the ownership of the soil, covering an extent of territory 
about eighteen miles from north to south, and of an average 
breadth of from eight to nine miles. Over this stretch of country 
they had wandered at ease, examining every bit of meadow land on 
the Great river and its tributaries. The familiarity of the inhab- 
itants at a very early period, with their meadows, swamps, boggy 
lands, uplands, mountains, hills, "lo" lands and high lands; their 
islands, rivers, brooks, ponds, "grinlets," and "runs of water," 
when we consider the extent of the township, and the labors that 
filled their hands, is surprising. During the life of the plantation, 
a man's acres in the meadows determined the amount of his taxable 
estate. His interest in the purchase of the township was deter- 
mined by the number of pounds annexed to his name as a signer of 
the plantation agreement— the highest interest being indicated by 
^100, the lowest by ^50. The relation between the one hundred 
or the fifty pound interest, and the "purchase paid," has not been 
learned. That there was a purchase of the township made by the 
planters in some form, and quite distinct from the purchase from 



204 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

the aboriginal inhabitants, is evident; but nothing- definite or explan- 
atory concerning it has been left on our records. The scheme that 
seems to have been carefully wrought out for the adventurers and 
voyagers, before the Massachusetts Bay Company set sail from 
England, affords certain hints in relation to the sub-divisions of 
interests and lands that ensued in that colony, and also in Con- 
necticut. It seems probable that the proprietors became holden to 
the colony, through the committee appointed by it, for all the costs 
and charges incident to the settlement of the plantation, including 
their Indian purchases and the work of the committee, together 
with all other incidental expenses. In the Massachusetts Bay, 
every adventurer who placed ^50 in the common stock was to have 
two hundred acres of land. vSo in our own case, each planter 
secured lands according to his venture in the common stock. The 
division or allotment of lands in the former case was, in the begin- 
ning, left to the governor; in Mattatuck, to the committee. It is 
true that the men of Farmington told the Indians that the "Colony 
gave away their lands for the English to work upon without taking 
anything for it," but that was years before Waterbury was settled. 
If the above suggestion is in accordance with the actual purchase, 
then the amount of a man's propriety, if it was nominally ^100, 
governed the amount of money he paid toward that purchase. In 
return for this payment, the man with the £100 propriety received 
from the committee twice as much meadow land as his neighbor who 
held but half his tenure in the township. There is no one thing 
that more finely sets forth and fully illustrates the implicit faith 
of our fathers in the all-controlling power of the God in whom 
they trusted, than the manner of their drawing of lots for their 
lands. To them, this was a "solemn and awful ordinance;" it was 
God who stood within it, directing the issues that fell to His chil- 
dren. If a man drew the first chance, which gave him power to 
choose his land where he pleased, it was the Lord of heaven and 
earth who dwelt in that chance and appointed that he should 
receive it. The man w^ho was reserved to the last and left no choice, 
believed that he was appointed for that lot, and accepted his por- 
tion. We believe that the men of ]\Iattatuck, in like manner and 
with equal solemnity, approached " the solemn and awful ordinance 
of a lot," and accepted their allotments and divisions of upland and 
boggy meadow in the same spirit of devout submission. We stand 
two centuries away from this belief and condemn the lottery, quite 
ignorant of the fact that our fathers held it as an holy ordinance, 
and that it is this very elimination of God from it which brought it 
into disrepute. 



WA TERB Un Y IN 1680. 2^ ^ 

Before 1689, the following- apportionment of lands had been 
made: The eight-acre house lots on Town Plott in 1674- the two- 
acre house lots on the east side of the river in 1677 or 1678; and to 
these had been added, probably at the same time, and apparently 
to each proprietor, one acre in Manhan neck.* This must have 
been to afford a garden spot, where the land was already in readi- 
ness tor the planter, on which food supplies, needful for immediate 
use, might be raised. There was also an eight-acre lot given to 
each proprietor. In addition to the above, there was a division of 
meadow land before 1679, and, probably before that time, one of 
boggy meadow. Of the layout of the above two divisions no record 
has been found. In the eleventh volume of the Land Records we 
find a copy of the order for the dividing of certain meadow lands in 
1679. In 1891, the order itself was found, which we give below. 
The literal form of the original document is not copied, as the inex- 
perienced reader would need a translator to comprehend it, but the 
language is carefully followed. It is called : 

THE DIVISION TO THE STRAITS. 

The order which is agreed of in the dividing of and drawing of lots for those 
lands which " Lyeth " down the river from those lands already laid out to the 
" rivurit" [Beacon Hill brook] which runneth into the river on the east side of the 
river at the straits [of the Naugatuck river, below Naugatuck] ; and also a meadow 
which is up the river from the town plot called by the name of Buck meadow [on 
the west side of the river above Mount Taylor] ; and, in the dividing of the above 
said lands, we agree that three roods of the best of this land shall be accounted as 
one acre, and the worst of the land which we divide shall be accounted seven roods 
but for one acre, and so rise or fall in this division according to the goodness or 
badness of this land, and this to be considered and equalized by those which are or 
shall lay out this aforesaid land into their several allotments ; and also we agree 
that there shall be five acres allowed to a hundred pound allotment, and if these 
lands appointed to this division shall fall short to allow according to this propor- 
tion to every allotment, then those which fall short to take up their proportion in 
any undivided meadow, except a piece of land called the pasture, or a parcell of 
land which lyeth at the brook which runneth into Steele's meadow ; and in this 
division it shall be in the power of the above said persons if they see reason so to 
do to throw in lands into the several allotments and count it not in the measure 
according to their discretion and we begin in this division at the south side of the 
river and the lots to run south aud north which we count up and down the river 
and the first lot in order to be accounted that next the river and so run down the 
meadow to the " strayts " aud take the lots in order as they fall at the north end 
and at the straits run over the river at the east side of the river in like manner, and 
go upward and end at the divided land at the fore said side, and then go up into 
Buck's meadow and begin in that allotment at the southward or lower end and go 
upw^ard and end at the upper side or end of that meadow. 

* Manhan neck surrounds Neck hill, which is the iitcadon' hill that overlooks the present ball grounds. 



2o6 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

The lots as they fell by succession : 

Great Lot. Benjamin Jones, 

Abraham Anclrus, Samuel Hikcox, 

John Carrington, John Warner, 

Benjamin Barnes, Samuel Judd, 

John Wilton, Daniel Warner, 

William Judd, Timothy Standly, 

John Judd. Benjamin Judd. 

William Higginson, Thomas Warner, 

David Carpenter, Daniel Porter, 

Joseph Gaylord, Isaack Bronson, 

John Scovill, Joseph Hikox, 

Edmund Scott, Thomas Newell, 

Thomas Richason, Thomas Judd, 

John Langdon, John Standly. 

John Newell, '■ y lote Botte," 

[The lot bought], 
Obadiah Richards, 
Thomas Hancox, 
John Bronson, 
Great Lot. 

The two pieces of land that were excepted from use in this 
division, were the Little pasture, and the fifteen acres on Steel's 
brook, which had been set apart for the use of the ministry, by the 
Assembly's Committee in November, 1679. That act remained in 
force until the present session of the General Assembly of Connec- 
ticut (1893), at which session the First Church of Waterbury, after 
enjoying- its inheritance for two hundred and sixteen years, sought 
and obtained h\i:;al power to alienate it. The moral right is still in 
question. 

The Waterbury Driving Co. is the present owner, or occupier 
of the fifteen acres on Steel's brook. This division of meadow 
lands has been so carefully followed, that we are able to place defi- 
nitely the land of each and every owner. The mouth of Hop 
brook was the place of departure. The land between the brook 
and the river was a "great lot." Afterward, it belonged to the pro- 
priety that was given to Rev. John Southmayd, who, when he 
recorded it to himself (as seven acres and one-half), stated that it 
included the island between the river and the brook. This is the 
island that lies in the Naugatuck river against the mouth of Hop 
brook. Abraham Andrews seems to have had his lot cast next the 
minister on this as well as on other occasions. His house lot, his 
Straits division, his Beaver meadow, his Hancox meadowy his Tur- 
key hill field, and even his seat in the meeting-house, were next the 
minister. In course of time the lot of Andrews, by purchase, 



WA TEliB UR Y IN 1G89. 207 

iDecame twelve acres, and about 1790 was still known as Andrews 
island ! The railroad station at Union City is on a portion of it. 
John Carrington, Benjamin Barnes and John Welton also had their 
lots on Hop brook, substantially between it and the river. William 
Judd's lot began below where the Great hill meets the river, against 
Mr. J. H. Whittemore's house, and extended below the present river 
bridge. In 1687 this was called eight and a half acres. The point 
was so heavily washed by floods, and so much of it was hopelessly 
barren, that when duly measured it was accounted twenty acres, 
showing how great was the discretion of the measurers in "throw- 
ing in" land. This became the "Deacon's meadow," which name it 
retained for many years. The three men whose names are next on 
the list had their lots on the west side of the river — David Carpenter's 
lying on both sides of "Towantick " brook [Long-Meadow]. The 
hill against the canoe place was passed over, and then five lots, 
(John Langton's being the southernmost), occupied the meadow 
spaces as far down as " Straight's " mountain. We find fourteen 
meadows on the west side of the river. On the east side, the lots 
were divided by the rough, rugged hills that came to the river, so 
thai only nine lots (beginning with John Newell's at Beacon Hill 
brook, and ending with Daniel Porter's lot, which for some not 
understood reason, ended before reaching the "hither end of Judd's 
meadows," leaving ten acres between it and Squantuck or Fulling 
Mill brook). Ten lots in this division were laid out up the river, 
beginning at Buck's meadow; Isaac Bronson's being the first, and 
the others following in the order given in the list. "Y. lote Botte " 
or The Lot Bought, became Reverend Jeremiah Peck's. Obadiah 
Richard's lot was on both sides of the river. Buck's meadow not 
containing sufficient land to complete the list, Thomas Hancox's lot 
was given to him, perhaps a mile above, at a place spoken of as the 
"Slip," and also as "The Butcher's Island," Hancox Island, Ensign 
Judd's Island and W^elton's Island. John Bronson went into Wal- 
nut Tree meadow, above Buck's meadow, for his allotment. The 
final lot was a great lot. It became Jeremiah Peck's and the school 
lot. This lay east of the river at Walnut Tree meadow. AValnut 
Tree and Buck's meadow we find used interchangeably, that is for 
the land on the east side of the river. 

The following preamble in relation to a meadow division of 1679, 
is new material that was found in 1890: 

A MEADOW DIVISION OF 1679. 

May, '70. The plantars of Mattatuck being at the town plot added by vote 
Thomas Judd to William Judd, John Standly, and Sam. Stell, to equalize the land 
to lay out in the division of land from jNIanhan meadow upward and make addition 



208 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



to those lots in that division according to the quality of the land and remoteness of 
it as the foresaid parties shall judge to be just and right. 

The first meadow, ...... 

" 2d '• 

" 3d " west side the river, 
East side river, the first meadow from the south 

12 acres. Island 5 acres 

Second meadow, east side, .... 



20 acres. 



17 



The following" is the result of the work of the committee : 

The division of the remainder of the land in Manhan meadow and Steel's mead- 
ow, and Ben. Judd's meadow, and Hancox meadow and at the small brook, as follow- 
eth : We first began at Manhan meadow, and second, in Hancox meadow, and 
third, at a bit of land at the west side of the river against Hancox meadow, and 
fourth, at the south end of the brook against Hancox meadow, fifth at the lower 
end of the land which lies at the brook which comes down into Steele's mead- 
ow, and go upward and end at the north end of Ben. Judd's meadow, at Will- 
iam Higginson's lot, and according to this order to draw lots, two acres to a 
hundred pound, and if these lands herein e.xpressed fall short of this divison, then 
to be made up by any undivided lands except this " Bit of Lande called a Pastors." 
We began in Hancox meadow at the southward end at that bit at the west side of 
the river against Hancox meadow at the south end 

The lots as they fell in this division in or by drawing. 

.\CRES. 

1 John Bronson, 

2 Joseph Gaylord, 

3 Tho. Warner, 

4 Edmund Scott, 

5 Obadiah Richards, 

6 Daniel Warner, 

7 John Newell, 

8 Thomas Hancox, 

9 John Warner, 

10 Great Lot, . 

11 John Carrington, . 

12 Ben. Jones, 

13 Samuel Hicox [£ 95] 

14 Will. Higginson, 

15 John Welton, 

16 Tho. Newell, . 

17 Benj. Judd, 
iS John Langdon, 

19 Isaac Bronson, 

20 John Judd, 

21 Thomas Richason, . . . . .1 

22 Abraham Andrews, ..... i 

23 Great Lot, ....... 3 

24 Great Lot, . 

25 John Scovill, 

26 David Carpenter, 



ALF-ACRES. 


RODS 


half 


16 


half 


32 


00 


00 


00 


00 


half 


16 


00 


32 


00 


GO 


00 


00 


03 roods 


3 


00 


00 


00 


32 


00 


00 


[?] 


32 


I rood. 


24 


half 


16 


3 rood, 


8 


3 


S 


00 


00 


3 rood. 


3 


00 


00 


00 


00 


l^alf 


16 


00 


00 


00 


00 


half 


16 


half 


16 



WATERBURY IN 1680. 209 

ACRES. HALF-ACRES. RODS. 

27 John Standly, 2 00 00 

2.8 Daniel Porter i 3 roods 3 

29 William Judd, ...... 2 00 00 

30 Timothy Standly, i 3 roods 24 

31 Joseph Hikcox, ...... i 00 32 

32 Ben. Barnes, ...... 2 00 00 

33 Samuel Judd, i half 16 

.34 Tho. Judd, ...... 2 00 00 

THE THREE-ACRE LOTS. 

In March, 1678, an order was given for the la3ano- out of the addi- 
tion to the house lots. The lots of this division are known as the 
three-acre lots. Our records contain nothing in relation to it, but 
the quaint old paper containing the lay out was- among the treas- 
ures recovered in i8go. It is here given; and is, it is thought, in the 
writing of William Judd. 

The order which the addition of the house lots in ]Mattatuck as it is to be taken 
up. Those that desire to take up their addition in the rear of their house lots we 
shall do all that we can to accommodate each man in that particular to be suited 
first and 2-3 so go on in that order. 

1 Benjamin Barnes. 

2 Samuel Hickox. 

3 Joseph Hickox. 

4 John Welton. [Next east of the Burying Yard.] 

5 Abraham Andrus. [Between the Mill-land and the ]Mad River, and South of 

Union Square.] 

6 Benjamin Judd. [Between the ancient Judd's ^Meadow road that ran east of 

the Pine hill (now removed) and the Mill-land ] 

7 John Bronson. [wSeldom, if ever, had his lands recorded.] 

S William Higginson. For " Will " Higginson " piched " north side of "Sam" 

Judd. 
'). Thomas Newell. [Between Farmington Road and the Mad River, largely on 

the West Side of Dublin Street.] 
10. Thomas Hancox. 

11 Samuel Judd. 

12 John Newell. To receive two acres at the rear of his lot. [It will be remem- 

bered that John Newell's house lot when recorded, contained five acres.] 
13. Great Lot next Tho. Richason. Pitched for the Great Lot, south side Ror- 

ing river . . . butting at John Carrington's east. [Mi-. Peck was allowed 

to relinc[uish this lot, and take three acres between Farmington road and the 

river, east of Dublin Street.] 
14 Thomas Richason. 

15. "Adward " Scott, to receive his lot at the east side of the Roaring River. 

16. John Carrington. [Next east of Mr. Peck on the south side of Roaring, or Mad 

River.] 
17 Benjamin Jones. Ben Jons south side Roaring River next to that I piched of 

for great lot. 

iS 

14 



2IO HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

19 David Carpenter. Piched for David Carpenter [illegible] " Tho " Hancox, if he 

like it. 

20 "Themotliy" Standi}-. "Piched" for Timothy Standly at the south of 

Thomas Richason's, if he like it. 

21. Daniel Porter. 

22. John Judd. For John Judd, north side of John Warner's lot, Roring River 

if he like it. 

23. Thomas Judd. [Lieut. Thomas Judd's three-acre lot was in the rear of his 

house lot, but separated from it by Grove Street.] 

24. John Standly. To receive "Achur" more. [This acre was added to his house 

lot.] / 

25. John Scovill. 

26. John Lanckton. Pitched for [?] south of Timothy Standly. 

27. Obadiah Richards. 

28. Great Lot next Abraham Andrus. 

29. Thomas Warner. 

30. Isaac Bronson. To receive 2 acres, end of his lot. [This lay out explains why 

Isaac Bronson held a four acre house lot.] 
31 John Warner. 

[32] Daniel Warner next John Warner. 
[33] Joseph Gaylord. 
[34] Great lot estend. [This was the ministry lot at the cast end, on Bank street.] 

The above paper is authority for the statement that the first 
English name of Mad river was Roaring river. During all this 
period we find nothing to indicate that the people of Waterbury 
possessed that most essential and central figure of colonial townships, 
a "minister," but we may not for one moment indulge the thought 
that the preaching of the Word and the teaching of the inhabitants 
were neglected. The General Court was at the helm, and we are 
persuaded that it did not allow Waterbury colonists to drift into 
barbarism. It is true that we cannot point to a single line of evi- 
dence concerning this matter, beyond the question that was asked 
about 1682, by the planters : "Which of the great lots shall be for 
the minister's use?'' until the year 1688, when a certain meadow 
division that had been planned in 1684 was consummated. In this 
division, Mr. Frayser is found in the possession of land belonging 
to one of the three grand divisions of ^^150 each. The title Mr. 
was reserved exclusively for "Ministers of the Gospel" and digni- 
taries in civil affairs, in the early days of the colony. This, 
together with the presence of the same name in 1687 (where it 
appears as Mr. John Fraysor) in a list of gentlemen who were clergy- 
men of the Established, or Congregational church, suggests that 
Mr. Frayser was, at the time, acting minister for the inhabitants of 
Waterbury. 

A somewhat careful study of the dealings of the General Court 
with the towns under its jurisdiction, seems to justify the writer in 



WATERBURY IR 1680. 211 

a statement to the follov^-ing- effect — that, in 1686, when Mattatuck 
was accepted as a town, she had chosen a minister, and that he was 
already living- in the house that had been built for him on the house 
lot next to Thomas Richason's (the site now occupied by the resi- 
dence of Mrs. John C. Booth), and that the Court's blessing was 
obtained in consequence of this action on the town's part. This 
statement receives substantial aid in the very language used in the 
proprietor's meeting at which it was agreed to invite Mr. Peck to 
become the " settled " pastor. For thirty-three years the paper, 
which lies before me, containing the acts of the proprietors in rela- 
tion to Mr. Peck, remained unrecorded. Reverend John South- 
mayd testiiies on the document that he recorded it in the "first 
book, p. 9, March 20, 1722." The following is a copy. The clerk's 
formula has been retained. 

Att a meeting of the propriators of Watterbury; march the iS: 16S9 they did unani- 
musly desire M"' Jerimy pecke Sen' of grinage [Greenwich] to setle with them in 
the worke of the minestrj-; 

At the same meeting for the Incoragment of W peck Above faid: the prop?-ia- 
iors gave him the hoiifs built for the mincster, with the hom lote, att his first 
Entaranc there with his family: 

Att the same meeting the above said propriators of waterbury granted : M'' Jerimy 
pecke of grinage the other alotmants or general Devisons belongin to the minesters 
lot so caled provided he cohabit with them four yers and if the providens of god so 
dispos that lie Dye befor the four yers be out itt shall fall to his heirs: 

Att the same meetinge the propriaters granted to Calabe and Jerimy pecke the 
to hous lots layd out to the great lots on buting westerly on abraham andrus his 
hous lot [south-east corner of West Main and Willow streets] the other on ben 
jons his home lote and one of the grat lots of meddows with the sevarall Divisions 
of upland: upon condisons they bild each of them a tenantable hous that is to say 
a house upon each hom lote and dwell with them four yers: 

Two days later, the proprietors held another meeting at which 
they agreed to be at the charge of the transportation of Mr. Peck 
and his family, and cattle, and goods, to Waterbury. Samuel 
Hickox, Isaac Bronson and Obadiah Richards were chosen "to take 
as prudent a care as they can for to transport Islx. Peck and family 
and estate according to the vote above written for the benefit of 
the Town." 

It will be noticed that the proprietors, in giving to ^Ir. Peck a 
house, describe it as the " house built for the minister at his first 
entrance there with his family." Mr. Peck's family was still in 
Greenwich, and the language is evidently applied to an act already 
consummated, and refers to a former minister. There is a letter, 
written at Greenwich by Reverend Jeremiah Peck in response to 
an invitation he had received from the church at Barnstable to 



212 BISTORT OF WATERBURY. 

become its pastor, which is still extant. It belongs to the Governor 
Hinckley papers, and is in the Prince collection, which is in the 
present possession of the Boston Public Library. It throws light 
on the acts of the Waterbury proprietors, in relation to Mr. Peck 
and his son Jeremiah. ^Ir. Peck, in his letter to Governor Hinckley, 
asked what provision the men of Barnstable would be willing to 
make for his declining years, (Mr. Peck was no longer a young man) 
or for his family in the event of his death. He also inquired what 
opportunity Barnstable would afford for his son, as a school-master. 
The first question seems to offer an answer to the natural inc^uiry : 
Why was a great propriety, with all its belongings, bestowed upon 
Mr. Peck, when the use of that land w-as in the thoughts of the com- 
mittee and of the people ? It w^as doubtless freely g'iven in order 
to secure the services of a man of Mr. Peck's worth and abilit}^ 

Waterbury evidently needed a school-master to teach spelling, 
reading, and writing, and seemed quite as ready to evince gener- 
osity in that line, as in the former ; for to secure the presence of Jere- 
miah, Jr., and Caleb, tw^o sons of Mr. Peck, they were offered the 
second grand division of the three held by the township. Caleb 
. declined his allotments, and the one-half of the propriety was dedi- 
cated to "the school." Jeremiah Peck, Junior, was probably 
Waterbury's early, if not earliest school-master. Reverend Jere- 
miah Peck himself, was master of the Colony school at New Haven, 
twenty-nine years before he came to Waterbury. 

The year 1689 was a memorable one in our history. The need 
for the services and consolations expected from the minister w^as 
then imperative. "A distemper of sore throat and fever" passed 
through the colony. Secretary Allen in w'riting to Governor Brad- 
street, under date of August 9, w^rote: " It is a very sickly time in 
most of our plantations, in some, near two-thirds of our people are 
confined to their beds or houses, and it is feared some suffer from 
want of tendance, and many are dead amongst us, and the great 
drought begins to be very aftiictive." No session of the General 
Court could be held in August, because the Assistants were ill. Mr. 
Wadsworth, one of the members and the last survivor of the Com- 
mittee for Mattatuck, died in vSeptember. In Windsor, twenty-nine 
persons died within thirty-six days. In New London more than 
twenty deaths are recorded. We have no means of knowing the 
number of persons who fell victims to the disease in Waterbury. 
Through the Probate Court, we learn of the death in that summer 
or autumn of three of Waterbury's proprietors ; the eldest man in the 
community — Robert Porter, and Philip Judd — the last proprietor 
whose autograph has been found appended to the Plantation Agree- 



WATERBURY IN 1680. 213 

ment. He came to AVaterbury in 1677, with his wife Hannah, who 
was a daughter of Thomas Loomis of Windsor, and their three chil- 
dren, Philip, Thomas and Hannah. Two children, William and 
Benjamin, were born in Waterbury. According to Dr. Bronson, 
"he was the first of the original proprietors who died in Water- 
bury." The inventory of the estate of Robert Porter was presented 
to the Court, September 18, 1689, while that of Philip Judd was not 
received until November 2. Robert Porter's son Benjamin, also died 
in 1689. Joseph Hickox was the first of the planters of 1681 to die. 
He removed to Woodbury about 16S6, where he joined the church in 
May of that year, and his son Samuel was baptized there in vSep- 
tember of the same year. Benjamin Jones' estate appears in the 
Probate Court at New Haven, in 1690. It is not known whether the 
dead of 1689 were interred in Waterbury, or were carried to Farm- 
ington. John Warner made his will when about to leave Farming- 
ton for Mattatuck, and reciuested, in the event of his death, to be 
laid with his kindred in the place of burial at Farmington. The 
earliest mention of the " Burying yard " in Waterbur}', that has 
been noticed, is in the entry of the following land grant — made by 
John Hopkins in 1695: "The town grants to Edmund Scott a par- 
cel of land laying within the common fence, butting east on the 
burying yard, north on the fence, west on the highway." This 
highway, forming the western bound, was the highway to the old 
Town Plot. It ran across the meadows from present Willow street 
to the river. 

In September the business before the Court was urgent and of 
the utmost importance; but so universal was the prevailing illness 
that fourteen deputies to that session were absent. Ensign Thomas 
Judd was of the number. England and France being at war, 
the misery of it extended to their colonies. The Frenchmen of 
Canada, and the Englishmen of New England, alike, sought the aid 
of their Indian allies. It was a war session of the Court. It was 
determined to raise two hundred volunteers together with the 
Indians who were willing to go forth against the enemy. " To 
guard Albany and invade the French toward Canada," two " foot 
companyes " were ordered to go forth to that city. One company 
was placed under the command of our Derby neighbor, Ebenezer 
Johnson, who " had liberty to beat up the drum for volunteers to serve 
under him in every plantation in New Haven and Fairfield coun- 
ties." It was at this time that the office of Lieutenant-Colonel 
was first recognized ; the sergeant major of each compan}^ as 
well as all other officers, were placed under command of that 
mao-nate. 



214 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

Waterbtiry's list was to be made out in this year — apparently for 
the first time. "Tho. Jtidd, John Stanly and Isaack Brunson," being 
the appointed listers. John Stanly was also " confirmed L"*^ and 
Thomas Judd ensigne of the trayne band of Waterbury." Water- 
bury 's first commissioners were appointed, in the persons of Cap- 
tain Wm. Lewis and Captain John vStanly, who also served Farm- 
ing'ton in the same capacity. This was the year when freemen were 
to be admitted into the corporation, "being twenty-one years of age, 
of peaceable, orderly, and good conversation, and possessed of forty 
shillings in country pay, per annum." Being duly endorsed by the 
selectmen of his plantation, each man so admitted was to be duly 
" enrowled " by the Secretary of the Colony. Waterbury had in this 
year ten young men who had arrived at the required age. They 
doubtless, were peaceable, orderly, and of good conversation, and, 
possibly, to make their eligibility complete, lands were granted to 
them. Two of the number had already been made proprietors, and 
one, Joseph Scott, seems not to have attempted to settle in Water- 
bur v. 



CHAPTER XVI. 

BOOKS OF RECORD THE PROPRIETORS' BOOK THE PLACE WHERE THE 

MILL-STONES WERE BROUGHT OVER THE NEW ROAD TO FARM- 

INGTON THE FIRST SAW-MILL THE TEX MILES OF SEQUESTERED 

LAND — THE MINISTER'S DIVISION OF FENCE — INDIAN OCCUPANCY 

FORT SWAMP THE LONG WIGWAM THE SEVEN ACRE HOG FIELD 

NOTES OF WAR WATERBURY ENTERTAINS SOLDIERS — -SCOUTING 

MILITARY WATCHES. 

THE papers in the hands of the Assembly's Committee; the 
proprietors' record of their acts, commonly called " The 
Proprietors' Book ;" a Book of Grants, of which nothing 
remains but the index; a town book for conveyances of land, in 
which certain planters recorded lands which they owned at the 
time of record — the owners often satisfying themselves by simply 
announcing their ownership, together with the mention of the 
names of the persons from whom they had received the lands; and 
fourth, the Book of Town Meeting's and Highways, are the sources 
from whence we derive our knowledge of the progress of the town 
during a large part of its first half-century. Into the book of town- 
meetings and highways, many grants from the Proprietors' Book 
were copied; but the old book itself would seem to have fallen into 
careless keeping, for much of it has disappeared. Dr. Bronson 
described it in 1857, as "an old, dingy manuscript of foolscap size, 
which he dug out of a mass of forgotten rubbish, found in a private 
family, and with many of the leaves at the end rent and broken, 
and exceedingly brittle when handled." In 1890, through the cour- 
tesy of Dr. Bronson, it was received from the New Haven County 
Historical Society, where it had been deposited for safe keeping in 
r862. It contains twenty-six folio leaves, and its appearance, as 
here presented, testifies the accuracy of Dr. Bronson's description 
of thirty-five years ago. One leaf has been lost since 1857. This 
book is evidently the result of an effort made to preserve as much 
of the original as could be found at the time the leaves were sewed 
together in their present form. At a later date, additional records 
were prefixed, they having been made by Reverend John Southmayd, 
as proprietors' clerk. It contains the acts of sixty-three meetings. 
The earliest date is 1677 — the latest, 1722. But tv. o entries that 
were made before 1689, remain. 



2l6 



HISTORY OF WATEllBURY. 



The following miscellaneous items found among those copied 
from this book before its disintegration began, afford a glimpse of 
the growth of the town : 



•-■■^. 





KOI'RIETORS' BOOK OF RECORD, 1677-I722 



Under date of i6So (according to the transcription), there was 
given to Abraham Andrus, Senior, "a piece of land butting on the 
Mill river, and on the common fence against s"* Andrus 3 acre lot, 



FROM IGSr. TO 1691. 217 

provided it do not prejudice hig-hways, and he build a house, or set 
up a tan yard." In 1681, Abraham Andrews, vSenior, had a house on 
West Main street. He later built a house near the mill, but of the 
tan yard we find no mention. Soon after 1686, a decided effort was 
made to induce young men to build in the eastern part of the town, 
but this inducement to Andrews in t68o sug-g-ests a probable error 
made by the copyist in the date. In 1685, Joseph Gaylord received 
two acres of boggy meadow, upon y** accoimt of a corner of his 
house lot, [supposed to be the Irving Block corner], y' he hath con- 
sented to be layd out to y'' highway." In 16S6, the boggy meadow 
was increased by " four acres on y^' north s''. his two acres lying at 
y'^ heather end y*^ pople grinlet, to join to y' and run northward till 
he hath his compliment." This was on Long Hill. In 1687, he 
received four acres more, described as "at Judd's meadows, in y*" lo 
land up among y^ hills in a kind of a popple swamp." These lands 
were on "Toantick" or Long Meadow brook, near where Samuel 
Warner settled, and in the vicinity of Butler's house of pre-historic 
interest, and where, at a later date, William De Forest lived. 

In 1686, Stephen Upson received a grant of the ground his barn 
stood on, "to run a straight line to his gate post, and 4 acres for a 
pasture on the north side John Hopkins' three-acre lot the west 
side the Long hill." In 1687, he had "4 or 5 acres the north side 
the above, to spring to the hill at both ends." In 1686, "The town 
granted Srg. Judd five acres, to begin at the mouth of the brook 
that comes into Mill river ichere the mill stones were brought over.'' The 
next year he was granted an "addition to his five-acre lot at the 
7l/^7^/ river from the mouth of the brook to the foot of the hill north- 
ward, and to take in the low land, to run an east line to a rock from 
the foot of the hill." These grants have been followed until we are 
able to identify the mouth of the brook where the mill-stones were 
brought over, as Beaver Pond brook. It is now often called Hog 
Pound brook, the name of a branch having been substituted for the 
main brook. It enters Mad river at the east end of the East pond 
of the Brass Mill company. The grants mentioned, together with 
a subsequent grant, lie on the west side of Mad river south of the 
house of Mr. James Porter, and extend from the mouth of the brook 
mentioned to the present Cheshire road. The rock, which was the 
landmark mentioned, is in the meadow on the west side of the 
river, between it and the low green hill in the meadow. The Plank 
road may perhaps be said to pass through the first of the three 
grants; the pumping station of the City Water works to be on the 
second — westerly from which, the bound rock lies; while the third 
extends to the present Cheshire road, (at that point, a portion of 



2i8 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

the Farming-ton road of i6S6). Thomas, a son of Lieiitenant Judd, 
sold the land to Daniel Porter about 17 17. Porter sold it to Isaac 
Spencer; Spencer to Joseph Hopkins, and Mr. James Porter is the pres- 
ent owner of a part, if not all of the land inchided within the origi- 
nal grants. From whence the mill-stones were brought, we do not 
know. There was a mill-stone maker at that date, named Barnes, 
in the western part of the Colony, but there is no proof that he 
made our mill-stones, or that he was related to our Benjamin 
Barnes. The elder Governor Winthrop in a letter to his son 
John, then in England, wrote: "Bring mill-stones — some two and 
some three feet over," and it seems probable that Waterbury's first 
mill-stones were imported, and that they were borne from New 
Haven along- the ancient road from Milford to Farmington, until 
the Wallingford path to Waterbury was met. They were brought 
over Beaver Pond brook six years before the road from Waterbury 
to New Haven was ordered to be made. 

In 16S6, we find mention of a new road to Farmington. We get 
this in a grant to Philip Judd, made the year before he died, when 
he received " eight or ten acres on the east side of the branch of the 
Mad river on the right hand of the new road as we go to Farming- 
ton." This grant was long known as Philip's meadow, and is on 
the east side of Linsley, Linley or Lindly brook, which was prob- 
ably named from a family of "Lindsleys." While still of Bran- 
ford, they owned land in Farmingbury Society in Waterbury, in 
1780 and later. 

We obtain our first knowledg-e of the road from Cook street to 
Pine Hole, from a grant in 1686 to Abraham Andrews, of "five acres 
for a pasture upon the Little brook where the way shall begin at 
the north end of the plain above the Flaggy swamp and so to run 
across the swamp to the foot of the hill at the east side — and if he 
goes away, it shall return to the town again." 

The earliest intimation of a saw-mill comes in like manner. 
Samuel Hikcox, Jr., had arrived at an age to receive land, and was 
granted " three acres at the Pine swamp by the path that leads to 
the saw-mill on the brink of the hill taking in all the swamp." This 
swamp lies this side of Grange Hall on Saw-Mill plain, and the Meri- 
den road crosses it. The above grant establishes the fact that 
there was 207 years ago a saw-mill on or at the site now occupied 
by the "Leather Works" of Mr. AVilliam Rutter. The complete 
history of that mill site from the time of its occupancy in 1686, or 
earlier, down to the present time is doubtless within the range of 
possibilities. There was a gun factory there, I think, during the 
War of the Revolution; certainly in 1800. 



FROM mS.l TO ir,Ul. 219 

It was quite reasonable and natural that the northeastern sec- 
tion of the township— that lying nearest to Farmington, should 
first be selected for occupancy; but after a time the proprietors 
recognizing that the lands in that direction were rapidly disappear- 
ing into the hands of individuals, resolved to prevent the lay-out of 
more grants, near the town, on that side. Accordingly, late in 1686, 
it was decided that ''all the boggy meadows east from the town 
fence two miles north and southward from the town, should be 
sequestered for common lands." The same day, it was determined 
that not only the boggy meadows, but " all the land on the east side the 
fence around to the Mill river and to the East Mountain and north- 
ward to David's brook, should be and remain as common land." 
The original proprietors understood the terms of this sequestration, 
but the generation of twenty years later, seemed to recjuire a new 
statement concerning it, and in 1707, the proprietors sequestered 
"for the use of the town two miles from the corner of East Main 
and Cherry streets eastward, or, in the language of the act, 'two 
miles from the going down of the hill beyond Thomas Hikcox house 
east, and then from it two miles north and two miles south, and then 
to run at each end west to the common fence.'" Within this area, 
which must have included about ten square miles of the township, 
as it ran from David's brook on the north to the Long Meadow falls 
on the south, were the common pastures. Waterbury was unicpie in 
its i^ossession of a Horse pasture, a local name not yet entirely 
unfamiliar to the ear. " Ways for drifts of cattle " into the common 
pasture were frecpiently provided for, notably that one across the 
Mad river at Baldwin street. In this sequestered land, any inhab- 
itant might take fire wood, timber, or stone, but he might not lay 
out any grant of land within it. 

The " Proprietor's Book" as wx now have it, contains none of 
the grants cited. They belon;.; to the portions of it that have dis- 
appeared. The single entry of 1677 which it contains, records the 
removal of the town site from Town Plot. In 1686, we are given 
the apportionment of the minister's fence in five divisions of the 
common fence. This, it will be remembered, is the date of the 
town's admission into the Colony, and is three years before the 
arrival of Mr. Peck. This intimation, taken in connection with the 
other evidence which has been adduced, seems to determine the 
presence of a minister in Waterbury from 1686 to 16S8, if not at a 
still earlier date. 

It is from this book that we learn that Waterbury possessed a 
" Long Wigwam." Long wigwams were built for special uses, and 
were designed for the accommodation of assemblies of Red Men- 



2 20 HISTORY OF WATEIIBURY. 

They are described under that name b}- the earliest travelers in 
New England, who have left their observations upon record. Much 
time has been spent in a careful investigation of the region lying 
between the eastern bound of the sequestered lands, and the western 
bound of the ancient township of Farmington. By this investiga- 
tion, together with a most careful and exhaustive search of our towm 
records, a line of Indian highway, and as we believe, of Indian occu- 
pancy, has been found dotted with Indian place names, and extend- 
ing certainly from Farmington's west-bound to a point north of 
Waterbury's village plot of 1689. It lies along the region that may 
be designated as bounding the land on its northern side that was 
sold by the Tunxis Indians in 1674, to the men of Mattatuck. We 
find within our borders that crowning evidence of Indian occupancy 

a fort swamp. It lay north and west of the road to Farmington. 

The Meriden road passes through this swamp east of the house 
of George Hitchcock. A broad point of land extending into it, and 
now occupied by a house, formed an excellent site for an Indian 
fortress; while a brook called Fort Swamp brook flows out of the 
northwest part of the swamp, runs west, northwest and north into 
Lilly brook. Before reaching the brook it divides itself into several 
streams which uniting again form two streams, one flowing on either 
side of a small hill whence they enter Lilly Brook. 

A discontinued section of an old Farmington road ran southeast 
of Fort swamp. In 1788, a road was laid out, that is described as 
beginning at Farmington road a little east of Edmund Austin's, 
and as passing "Fort Swamp and brook. Tame Buck [a hill], and 
extending to the highway by Elnathan Thrashers and Ebenezer 
Frisbies." The latest mention of the swamp under its ancient name 
that has been met, is in 1 8 1 2. It has been called in recent years Ford 
swamp and sometimes Frost swamp, the names having become 
associated with it through the ownership of lands in it, or, in its 
immediate vicinity. 

In the line of Indian occupancy referred to, we find the follow- 
ing place names : " Patucko's Ring," a name that covered consider- 
able territory; Mantoe's House Rocks, and Wigwam Swamp, whose 
" west end lies at the north end of Burnt Hill." We also have " Kill " 
Plain, sometimes appearing as "Gill," and again as "Kiln" Plain; 
and the line being extended, we come upon Fort Hill (which may 
be of English origin). It is a sandy spur of the Mount Taylor 
range, and sometimes, from its peculiar outline, is' called the Tray 
Orchard, while to the northward lies " Mount Toby." This is fre- 
quently written Mount Tobe, while Mr. Southmayd alone probably 
gave to us its correct name, in Mountobe, an Indian name, and 



FROM lOSJ TO 1001. 221 

easily corrupted by the early recorders (who evidently disliked 
" monotonous spelling- ") into Mount Toby. We also find a place 
called Potostocks, and sometimes Porterstocks, whose signification 
is not known, and Nonnewaug Hill,* and Nonnevvaug Plain, and 
Race Plain, while in the west part of the township, now Middle- 
bury, we find the Wongum Road. 

Taking the East Farms school-house as a centre, we find our- 
selves in a region that at a period beyond which our records extend, 
tradition notes, as a hog pound. It is not far from the ancient 
bound line of Farmington, and may have been in use by the people 
of that town. Corroborating tradition, in 1689, when lands were 
granted thereabout. Hog Pound brook antedated the grants. South 
of the school-house, it is said, "lay the hog pound itself, and that 
the swine were permitted to roam the country at will, but were 
accustomed to obey the call that occasionally summoned them to 
the pound, where they were rewarded by a treat of corn." How- 
ever that may have been, in 1689, 133 acres in that vicinity were 
divided into nineteen hog fields of seven acres each. These are 
arranged in five groups, and were distributed to nineteen planters. 
The first three fields are described as '' upon the hill eastward 
of the path from the longe wigwam upon the hill;" seven were 
"on the hill on the west side of Hog Pound brook/' (this brook 
flows into Beaver Pond brook, west of the school-house);" three 
more were "on the west side of the Beaver Pond brook;" three 
were "on the hill on the east side of Hog Pound brook, and 
on the north side of the road that leads to Farmington," while 
the seven acres of the Rev. Jeremiah Peck's hog field are now 
covered by the waters of the upper " East Mountain " reservoir, 
he having received, together with two of his pari-shioners, allot- 
ments "at the southeast end of Turkey hill, to run both sides of 
the brook." 

Certain well-known names, attached to lands, served to denote 
locality as unerringly as the lighthouse fulfills its mission. Bron- 
son's meadow was one of the number. It lay along the Mad river 
in the broad valley north, or northerly of the red house where 
Justus Warner lived, and which, together with the ruin of the 
house of his father, Ebenezer Warner, with its central chimney and 
corner fire-place in every room, is still standing. The path to 
Bronson's meadow lay over Long hill in 1686. A grant on that hill 
was described as "on the north side the path that leads to Bron- 
son's meadow." 



* Nonnewaug Hill is between Steele's Brook and the West Branch, its southern end between Steele s 
Brook and Obadiah's Brook. 



222 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

The year 1689 was notable for the many and special gifts be- 
stowed upon the young men of the town. There was wide scope 
for this generosity, for the spirit of departure was abroad. The 
reasons for this were ample. Two years later, in writing of the 
condition of Waterbury, Mr. Peck wrote that the people had been 
brought low by losses of the fruits of the earth, losses in their 
living stock, and especially by " much sickness during the space of 
the last four years." To add to the picture thus drawn, war was 
again, and through no act of the Colony, thrust upon the people. 
No more defenseless town existed than this one. To the north- 
ward, from whence the French and Indians might descend upon it, 
there was no habited place. Waterbury had but thirty-seven men 
to defend about two hundred women and children. It is not sur- 
prising that our records are at this time abundantly sprinkled by 
such gifts to the 3-oung men as the following, in order to induce 
them to stay : "To John vScovill, Junior, a piece of land butting on 
John Warner's three acre lot on the east, on a highway on the west 
and south, on Thomas Judd, Jr., on the north, provided he build a 
house according to original articles and coinhabit four years after." 
This was at the northeast corner of Pine and Willow streets. " To 
Jonathan vScott, a piece of land," with bounds. This was on Union 
square, between it and Bank street. Ephraim Warner received 
a " piece of land " on Willow street, between Pine and Grove 
streets. 

Waterbury must have been a busy hamlet in 1690. We are in- 
debted to the new minister, Mr. Peck, for what we know of its part, 
humble though it was, in the war between France and England. 
He tells us that horsemen were often sent out in search of an ap- 
proaching enemy, and hints at timely discoveries that proved safe- 
guards to neighbors in other towns. It would seem that Waterbury 
was at that date in the line of march between Hartford and Albany, 
for he informs us that the town had " far more trouble than other 
towns in the Colony by the soldiers passing to and fro, and their 
often entertainments with us." 

The Colony asked to borrow of the people in every town pro- 
visions, grain, or any other estate, upon the public faith of the 
Colony, to be repaid again in ten months. Every male person 
whatsoever, if sixteen years of age, except negroes and Indians, 
was compelled to serve upon the " millitary watches." Any inhab- 
itant, being absent, whether at sea or elsewhere, was compelled to 
furnish a substitute through the members of his family left at 
home, and even widows, worth fifty pounds, were rec|uired to pro- 
vide a man to watch in their steads. 



FROM 1GS5 TO IGDl. 



223 



This military watch was kept by walking- or standing in the 
places where danger was apprehended from the enemy, and, from 
the charge given, it would seem that firing the woods was one 
mode of warfare adopted. If fire was discovered, the cry ordered 
was "Fire ! Fire ! " If the enemy was at hand, the watchman cried 
" Arme ! Arme 1 " Who can say that our Burnt Hill does not date 
from that war? Waterbury was one of the towns exempted from 
listing men to join the "flyeing army of dragoones," and a special 
grant of twelve pence a bushel was allowed it for what of the 
country rate should be transported to Hartford or New Haven. 
Nothing has been learned regarding the earliest fortified house or 
houses here; but, as every town in 1690 was ordered to "complete 
the fortifications that had been ordered,'' although the order itself has 
not been found, it undoubtedly included the frontier town of 
Waterbury; and as no one house could have accommodated the 
population at that date, more than one must have been prepared. 
We find no mention of fortified houses until 1703. 



CHAPTER XVII. 

THE REVEREND JEREMIAH PECK HIS PETITION TO THE COURT FOR 

PERMISSION TO GATHER A CHURCH IN WATERBURY THE CHURCH 

ORGANIZED — ITS DEACONS MR. PECK PETITIONS FOR ASSISTANCE 

IN BUILDING A HOUSE FOR THE WORSHIP OF GOD THE DISASTER 

(^p 169I DELAYS MR. PECK UNABLE TO PREACH HE CONVEYS 

HIS PROPERTY TO HIS CHILDREN "THE PRESENT MINISTER" 

THE TOWN BUILDS A HOUSE FOR ANOTHER MINISTER ENTHUSIASM 

OVER JOHN READ DEATH OF MR. PECK BURVING-YARD AT THE 

FOOT OF HIS GARDEN PROPRIETORS AT THE CLOSE OF THE 

CENTURY. 

'"T^HE exact date of the arrival in Waterbury of the Reverend 
I Jeremiah Peck is not evident, but that it occurred prior to 
May 20, 16S9, appears from a town act of that date : "The 
Town granted Mr. Peck and Edw^ard Scott, Jr., an addition to the 
north end of their house lots — Scott to spring northwards three 
rods on the northwest corner, and Mr. Peck to spring a rod and a 
half from the northeast corner of his lot, and so a straight line 
from the above said corners to bound them on the highw^ay, pro- 
vided they make and maintain a good and safe ditch to drain the 
land." This referred to the locality surrounding the site of wSt. 
John's Church. Edmund Scott, Jr., lived next w^est of Mr. Peck. 
Both house lots were between Church and State streets, and this 
land received the w^aters of the two streams that crossed West Main 
street near the corner of Church street. 

A clergyman of the " Congregational or Established Church of 
Connecticut Colony " at the period in question, could perform the 
functions of his ministerial office, only when ordained over a special 
church and people. Therefore Mr. Peck, when he left Greenwich — 
where he must have been an ordained minister, for we find him 
filling the various offices connected with the position — could not 
perform the same duties in Waterbury until the organization of a 
church, and his ordination as its pastor. It was for this reason 
that the planters continued to take their children to the old church 
at Farmington for baptism, even after the arrival of a minister 
already venerable in the service. Sixty-three children (and per- 
haps a greater number) were born in Waterbury between 1681 and 
1 69 1. Forty-five were baptized in P^armington before the date of 
the organization of the church in 1691, and fourteen of the number 



THE FIRST CHURCH OF WATERS CRY. 



225 



after Mr. Peck came. The last child baptized there for the reason 
given, was Ebenezer Richardson, son of Thomas, the planter, on 
June 28, 1691. 

The invitation on the part of the Grand Proprietors to Mr. Peck 
to "settle with them in the work of the ministry," was unanimous. 
The name of every one of their number then living and known to 
have been within the town, with the single exception of John War- 
ner's (whose name may have been — like that of Benjamin Judd 
from the list of original proprietors — an omission of the recorder), 
is appended to the agreement by which his salary of sixty pounds 
became assured. The following is the agreement : 

In Considaration of settling the reuarant : M'' Jerimy pecke in tlie worcke of 
the menestry : amongst vs : in watterbury : we whos names : are vnder writen : 
doe ingage : to pay to the aforsaid : m' Jerimy Pecke acording to our yerly grand 
leuy ecth : of us : our proportions of sixty : pounds by y" yere : to be payed fifty ; 
Pounds in Prouition pay : and ten pounds in wood and thus to doe : yerly 
Robert Porter : John brownson John newill 

Thomus Judd sen Samuel hickox Abraham andrews Sen 

John Standly Obadiah richards Daniell Warner : 

John wilton sen pilip Judd beniamin barns 

Edman Scoote sen Abram Andrews Thomus richardson 

Isaac brownson Thomus Judd Ju Timothy Standly 

Joseph gayler Thomus warner : John hopkins : 

Daniel Porter : Edman SCoot Ju steuen vpson 

Thomus newell 

Of the twenty-five men who signed the above engagement, 
which is without date, all are, or represent. Grand Proprietors. 
Robert Porter, whose name stands first on the list, w^ould undoubt- 
edly have been deacon of the church had he lived to see its organ- 
ization. We miss six names from the number. John Carrington, 
Joseph Hikcox and Benjamin Jones were dead at the time of the 
signing of the agreement; William Judd and Thomas Hancox were 
removed to Farmington, and John Scovill, it is thought, was in 
Haddam. Several younger men, to whom lands had been granted 
were unrepresented. 

In the then condition of the town, by reason of the disasters 
that were befalling it, Mr. Peck's presence must have been of the 
utmost importance and comfort to his people, for the minister filled 
a place in the life of the community at that date, that is not gen- 
erally understood. He was the reigning sovereign over his people, 
holding at the same time every office within his own government 
— being at once father, guide, counselor and deputy in all matters 
relating to the public weal, as well as revealer of the will of God to 
his children. His person and his presence were regarded with awe 



2 26 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

and reverence, and the nnmloerless sacrifices that were made for 
the privilege of possessing a " ]\Iinister of the Gospel" testify to 
the deep appreciation of the luxury. However grim and severe the 
outline of the planter's own house, his minister's house must pos- 
sess a chamber chimney, and glass for the windows; and a well, 
even though his own wife and children dipped from the waters of 
the running stream. Accordingly, we have found a house already 
built, and ready for Mr. Peck when he arrived, (his family consisting 
of his wife, their daughter Anna, and sons Jeremiah and Joshua). 
One naturally thinks of Mr. Peck with a feeling of commiseration 
that he should remove to Waterbury, at nearly seventy years of age, 
to begin a new life in the wilderness; but he came into the vicinity of 
his kindred, and nearer to his old home in Connecticut. His aged 
father was living in New Haven. He also had a daughter, Ruth 
Atwater, and five grandchildren living there. Still nearer, at Wal- 
lingford, were his brother John and his sister, Elizabeth Andrews, 
and nineteen nephews and nieces. 

It is said that Mr. Peck was born in London, England, or its 
vicinity, in 1623; that he came to America in the ship Hector in 
1637, with his father, Deacon William Peck, who was one of the 
founders of New Haven. From the time of his arrival until he 
reached his thirtieth year, the only mention that has been found of 
him appears in the account books of the steward of Harvard Col- 
lege, where are found^credits of Jeremiah Peck from 1653 to 1656. 
November 12, 1656, he married Johannah, a daughter of Robert 
Kitchell, of Guilford. He spent four years in Guilford, "preaching 
or teaching." In 1660 he was called to take charge of the Colony 
School at New Haven. When, two years later. New Haven colony 
came under the jurisdiction of Connecticut, Mr. Peck joined the 
band of devoted men who desired to found a new town and colony, 
in whose government no man might have part or lot, until he had 
acknowledged the government of his God by visible membership 
in church union. He thus became one of the first settlers of New- 
ark, New Jersey. In 1669 or 1670, he was settled as the first min- 
ister of Elizabethtown. In 1670 and again in 1675 he was invited 
to the church at Woodbridge, N. J., but the repeated invitations of 
the people at Greenwich at last won him back to Connecticut. Not- 
withstanding a "call" to Newtown, L. I., he removed in 1678 to 
Greenwich. It was while there, that he was desired to settle in the 
work of the ministry at Barnstable, Mass., and, as we know, at 
Waterbury. 

We are no longer surprised at the escort provided by the town 
for the safe conduct of Mr. Peck and his family on their journey 



THE FIRST CHURCH OF WATEIWUIiT. 227 

from Greenwich to Waterbury, when we remember the warlike 
condition of the country. It seems strangely out of place to write 
that a war between France and England delayed for two years the 

most important act that ever took place in the Naugatuck valley 

the organization of the First Church of Waterbury. Minor causes 
may have contributed to that end, but we are forced to believe that 
the event took place at the earliest moment practicable. War's 
alarms were not soon allayed; in fact, the "flankers " about the Meet- 
ing-House at New Haven were not removed until 1693. It would 
be interesting to know how long the people of Waterbury resorted 
to their fortified houses at night, and to hear again the stories of 
adventure told by the scouting parties on their return to the town 
but the records of the events of that period perished long ao-o, as 
they were thought not essential to the life of future generations. 

In the autumn of 1690, the dragoons in the several counties were 
disbanded, to return to their foot companies, and certain steps were 
taken that gave evidence that the dangers of the war, although not 
over-passed, were greatly mitigated. In the spring of 1691, Mr. Peck 
prepared a petition to the General Court, m which consent was 
requested by " some of the Inhabitants of Waterbury " to proceed 
to the gathering of a Congregational church. Mr. Peck's desire to 
be strictly accurate in his statements is apparent in the expression 
"we, at least some of the inhabitants," which occurs in the petition 
thereby implying that the desire was not entirely unanimous. Per- 
haps there were certain cautious persons who felt that the colony 
was not yet in a state of peace that would warrant so important a 
step, and perhaps the demands upon the town, by reason of the war 
had been such as to make the cost of the undertaking a cjuestion of 
moment. There was much entertaining to be provided for, as the 
approbation of the neighboring churches was as essential to the for- 
mation of a church, as was the consent of the Court. The follow- 
ing is the petition which was presented to the General Assembly, 
May 14th, by Ensign Judd: 

To the honored General Court our humble salutations presented: wishing all 
happiness may attend ye: we at least some of the Inhabitants of Waterbury being 
by the goodness of God, inclined and desirous to promoue [promote] the concerns 
of the Kingdom of Christ in this place by coming into church order: do iind: which 
we well approue of: that it hath been ordered by the honoured General Court: that 
no persons within this Colony shall in any wise imbody: themselues into church 
estate without the consent of the General Court and approbation of the neighbour 
churches, we humbly request the consent of the honoured General Court now 
assembling: that we may as God shall giue us Cause and assistance proceed to the 
gathering of a Congregational Church in this jDlace, and for the approbation of 
neighbour Churches we desire it and intend to seek it. So being unwilling too long 



2 28 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

to prevent 3'our Honors from other emergent occasions: we in breuity subscribe our- 
selues in all duty your humble Seruants in the name and behalf of the rest of our 

Brethren. 

Jeremiah Peck. 
From Waterbury. qi. May. 12. Isaac Brounsoon. 

The request met with instant favor in the subjoined response: 
Mr. Peck and Isaac Brunson, in the behalf of the people of Waterbury, petition 
ing this Court that they might have the liberty and favour of this Court to enter 
into church fellowship, and to gather a church in that place: This Court do freely 
grant them their request, and shall freely encourage them in their beginnings, and 
desire the Lord to give them good success therein, they proceeding according to 
rule therein. 

Therefore, in May, 169 1, the inhabitants were legally entitled to 
church organization. Having secured the franchise, the people 
seemed in no haste to avail themselves of the blessing. They 
waited three months before taking action.* 

If Mr. Peck kept a record of the church and its subsequent his- 
tory under his pastorate, it has disappeared from the knowledge of 
man. What we know in relation to it has come to us through the 
following agencies: 

In 1729, the Reverend Thomas Prince, of Boston, received a letter 
(evidently in response to inquiries made by him) from the Reverend 
John Southmayd, of Waterbury, containing certain information 
regarding the town and church in that place. In 1772, extracts 
from Mr. Southmayd's letter were made (I do not know by whom), 
and the extracts were among the manuscripts of Benjamin Trum- 
bull, D. D., of North Haven, at the time of his death in 1820. Dr. 
Trumbull had planned in 181 1, to write " The History of the Ameri- 
can Churches of every denomination of Christians within the United 
States of America," and had gathered much material in view of his 
proposed work. His historical papers and collections were be- 
queathed to Yale College. "All other books, manuscripts, pamph- 
lets, etc., were equally divided among the four children."! Justus 
Bishop, a son-in-law of Dr. Trumbull, was one of the executors of 
his will, and certain of the Trumbull manuscripts — extracts from 
Mr. vSouthmayd's letter being of the number — were brought to Water- 
bury by the late David T. Bishop, who was perhaps of the family 
of Justus Bishop, the executor. The paper in question is now in the 



*Dr. Eronson makes the following statement: "At what precise time the church of Waterbury was 
organized I have been unable to ascertain. Dr. Trumbull says, August 26, 1669, and Mr. Farmer, in his 
Genealogical Register, gives this as the date of his ordination. Probably Mr. Farmer copies from Trumbull. 
I once supposed that '1669' was a misprint for 1689, and that the last was the true time of Mr. Peck's 
settlement." He then adds: "In all probability the installation or ordination, took place soon after, pos- 
sibly August 26th, as in Trumbull." Dr. Trumbull gives Mr. Peck's name as Joseph, instead of Jeremiah. 

■(•North Haven Annals. By Sheldon E. Thorpe, 1802. 



THE FIRST CllUIiCII OF WATFRBUHY. 229 

possession of Mr. James Terry, of New Haven.* It is not now 
known whether Mr. Southmayd gave the following facts from the 
then existing records, or from information given by participators 
in the interesting event, for Abraham Andrews and his wife, Ben- 
jamin Barnes, Mrs. Daniel Porter and Stephen Upson were still 
living, and Mr. Southmayd himself had been familiar with the field 
almost thirty years, having preached in Waterbury within five 
months after the decease of Mr. Peck. The following is a transcript 
of the extracts of 1772 made from Mr. vSoiithmayd's letter of Novem- 
ber 18, 1729, as given by Mr. James Terry, and is the sole source of 
our information (as it apparently was of Dr. Trumbull's) regarding 
the age of our church. The portion of the transcript relating to 
the settlement, with which we are already familiar, has been omitted. 

WATKRi;URV. 

EXTRACTS MADE FROM THE COLLECTIONS OK THE REv'd MR. PRINCE, AT liOSTON, 

ANNO 1772. 
********** 

The number of original shares [in the plantation] about 33. The first settlers 
about 2S. 

The first Church in Waterbury was formed August 26, 1691 — the number of 
male communicants 7, and in 1729, 46. 

Mr. Jeremiah Peck was ordained Pastor of the Church the same day in which it 
was formed, viz. Aug. 26, 1691. He was after some years by a Fit of the Appoplex, 
disenabled for the work of the ministr}-, and some years after, June 7, 1699, left this 
world in y 77th year of his age. 

May 30th, 1705, The Rev' John Southmaid was ordained Pastor in his Room. 
The number of males then was 12. This town was not at this day divided into 
precincts or societys. In February, 1691, There was a remarkable Flood in this 
town. The meadows were all under water and the ground so soft and the stream 
so rapid that it tore away a great part of the meadows, and almost ruined them. 

The frost came out very quick and the rain fell apace, which made the ground 
uncommonly soft. 

The town did not recover from the damage it received by this deluge for many 
years. Some of the inhabitants were grately discouraged, and many drew oif, and 
the town was almost ruined. 

There was a dreadful sickness in this Town, wh. began in October about the 15th 
1712, and did not cease until Sepf 13, 1713. More than 20 persons died in this town 
within this time. 7 died in the month of March, and the sickness was so great that 
there were hardly enough well to tend the sick. 

This from M'- John Southmayd, Nov iSth, 1729. In a letter to the Rev' Thos. 
Prince. 

It is to be regretted that the extractor of 1772 did not give to us 
the letter in full, but the history of Waterbury meets with denials 
like this at every step in its progress. Inference and speculation 

*The catalogue of the Prince manuscripts does not, I think, contain this letter, but it may have been 
among the papers that were destroyed, or carried away from the library of Mr. Prince at the time the British 
troops were in possession of the Old South Meeting-House. in whose tower the library was kept. 



2^0 BISTORT OF WATERS URT. 

mi^lit be indulg'ed in, almost without limit, in regard to the founda- 
tion of this church, without any increase of knowledge regarding 
it. It is, or seems to be, quite safe to make a few statements. The 
first is, that the usages and ceremonies of the Congregational 
church, as established in Connecticut colony, were carefully 
adhered to; the second, that the neighboring churches of Hartford, 
Farmington, Woodbury, Wallingford, Derby and New Haven were, 
or may have been, represented by their appointed elders and mes- 
sengers; that the organization and ordination ceremonies occupied 
two days; that the "laying on of hands" by duly ordained men, 
and the "right hand of fellowship" were ceremonially conducted; 
and lastly, that the "seven male communicants" extracted in 1772 
from Mr. Southmayd's letter of 1729, were, in reality, referred to in 
the letter itself as the seven pillars of the Waterbury church, for 
that number of members was evidently considered essential to 
uphold the stately organization known as a church. We are not able 
to mention the "visible saints" who were considered "fit matter," 
or the special form of their confederation which established them 
into a "visible church;" neither do we know the particular cov- 
enant by which they became embodied into a "true, distinct and 
entire church of Christ;" but we may be and are confident that Mr. 
Peck was the central figure of the seven; that to him belonged the 
"power of guidance or leading;" while to the brethren, in full com- 
munion, was committed "the power of judgment, consent, or privi- 
lege," and that communion of the churches, and counsel from them 
in cases of difficulty, was to be sought and submitted to, ''according to 
God." The foundation was firmly laid, and the superstructure rests 
to-day upon substantially the same basis — the fundamental question 
still calling through the centuries : What is, according to God? 

It ought perhaps to be mentioned in connection with the 
Waterbury church, that the example that the mother church at 
Farmington had set in 1652, doubtless was a formative influence in 
1691. That church was organized by the "joining in the cov- 
enant " of seven men, of whom Reverend Roger Newton was one. 
At a later date members were added. There was a distinction in 
the degree of membership, however, delineated by the terms 
applied to different holders of the honor. Certain members were 
"joined to the church;" others were "joined to the congregation;" 
while a few were recorded as "joined in the covenant." Abundant 
instances might be cited in proof that the " seven-pillar " form of 
covenant was followed often, if not universally. Salem and 
Scituate churches are mentioned as evidence in Massachusetts, 
while the first church organized in Connecticut, that at Wethers- 
field, was formed in the same manner. 



THE FIRST CHURCH OF WATERS URT. 231 

Fifty-three years later, in 1747, Deacon Thomas Jiidd died, and 
the memorial stone placed above his grave tells us that he was "the 
first Justice, Deacon and Captain " in Waterbury, and that his age 
was 79 years. The hand that prepared the inscription was led into 
error, for the man whom it delighted to honor was five years older 
than the stone-age assigned him; and it was his uncle, Lieut. 
Thomas Judd, who was the first justice of the peace. His claim as 
the first captain is uncpiestioned, while the statement that he was 
the first deacon is subject to question. It may be true that the 
church was without deacons for nearly five years, but it is not cer- 
tain that it was so. The sweet reasonableness of a thing does not 
resolve itself into history; if it could, we might with every pro- 
priety suggest that the Waterbury church, even as other churches 
had done, appointed tiuo deacons; that they may have been Corporal 
Isaac Bronson and Lieutenant John Stanley; that the records 
retained the military titles that had already become familiar, and 
that in 1695, when Lieutenant Stanley returned to Farmington, 
Thomas Judd was elected to fill the vacancy, as in 1696 we find 
Beacon Thomas Jiidd taking the place in the records formerly occu- 
pied by Thomas Judd, the smith. If we depend upon our town 
records for the evidence of deaconship, we shall find but one deacon 
in the church for thirty-three years. The alacrity with which even 
Deacon Judd permitted his military title to conceal his ecclesias- 
tical standing, evidences the ease with which, in the absence of 
church records, the first deacons have passed into oblivion. 

As soon as possible after the church was organized, preparations 
were made for building a house for the worship of God. In the 
State Library we find in Ecclesiastical Papers, Vol. I. p 89, the fol- 
lowing autographic petition for aid in the work, in which Mr. Peck 
gives to us glimpses of the life his people were then and had been 
living. 
The Petition to the Gener.a.l Court for Assistance in Building an House 
FOR THE Worship of God. 

[May it] please the honourable Generall Assembly to take into [their] serious 
consideration the Condition & Request of your humble & [loving] servants the 
Inhabitants of Waterbury, as to our Condition. The [Providen]ce of God & that 
in severall wayes, hath brought us low by losses [of the fr]uits of the earth, losses 
in our living stock, but especially by much [sickness] among us for the space of 
the last four years: We live remotely in a corner of the wilderness [wh]ich in our 
affairs costs us much charge pains & hardships. As to our Petition & that which 
we desire; it is your encouraging & assisting of us as we hope in a good work; yet 
too heavy for us; viz the building of an house convenient for us to assemble in for 
the worship of God ; Such an house we doe more & more find very great need of. 
Wee return our honoured gentlemen hearty thanks for the late encouragement 
they gave us unto Church work; wee are embolden fro. our past experience of your 
former candidness & favour toward us: yet once more to present this our humble 



232 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

Petition for your help in this great & needfull affaier. Much we could mention by 
way of persuasion: but we are prevented of time ^: we hope that a few words to 
the wise will be sufficient. It may be considered that we have been often at 
charges in sending forth horsemen for the timely discovery of an approaching 
enemie, which hath been or might have been some safeguard to our neighbours in 
other Townes. For this our Scouting we have had no public recompense. We 
also have had farr more trouble than some other Townes in this Colonie by the 
souldiers passing to 8c fro &- their often entertainments with us, which hath occa- 
sioned much expense of our time etc. We also are informed that we shall not be 
the first that have had publique assistance in the like work in this Colonie. We 
hope right worthy Sirs that you that are the Patrons of this Christian Common- 
wealth; will be pleased to give us further encouragement to build God's house & 
the encouragement which we doe particularly petition for is that our Publique 
rates may be given to us for the space of the four next ensuing years. We iind in 
holy writ that some whose spirit God hath Stirred up have been famous in promot- 
ing such a work; as David 8z Solomon. We hope & trust we shall have a placid 
return fro. our Worthies upo. whom our eyes are: So we remain your humble & 
needy Petitioners and Servants. 

From Waterbury. Anno Domini. 91 October. 7. 

In the name &• on the behalf of the rest of our inhabitants. 

John Hoi-kins. ) j^,,,,,„,,,,^ 
Thomas Judd, ) 

The petition was answered the next day. 

October, 1691. 

Upon the petition of Waterbury this Court grants them their present country 
rate toward the erecting of a house for the pub: worship of God in that towne, 
prouided they improuc it for that use and no other. 

This people — our fathers — "living remotely in a corner of the 
wilderness, brought low by many losses and by much sickness dur- 
ing the space of four years," (to which had been added two years 
of war's alarms), had just risen up to prepare a house for the wor- 
ship of God, and were taking hold on life anew, when a sudden and 
awful blow fell iipon the little town. By a mighty freshet, their 
precious meadows, on which they chiefly depended for the support 
of life, were torn up by the roots and carried away. From the 
Plum Trees, a meadow above Lead Mine brook on the north, to the 
straits below Judd's meadows on the south, the spring of 1691 gave 
stones for bread, — and yet the brave planters held on. Not a man 
left the settlement! Their meadows gone, they clung to the hills, 
and began to lay out mountain lots. We, who have so often seen 
the wrath of the Naugatuck, when in a spring freshet its furrowed 
waters dashed over the meadows, islanding Hop meadow hill, and 
covering all the region between the river and Meadow street, (thus 
completely cutting off access to present Brooklyn and West Side 
hill), can tmderstand something of the blow that then befell Water- 
bury. The smaller meadows on the Mad river and the branches of 
both rivers doubtless suffered too, thus forcing every man to spend 



THE FIRf<T CHURCH OF WATEBBUBY. 233 

his days in a struggle with forest trees and stones for the posses- 
sion of the soil hidden under them in the hills. Under these con- 
ditions, the work of building the house for the worship of God was 
retarded. When the floods came, Waterbiiry had forty-three tax- 
payers, and not estimating dwelling houses, a list of ;^i859. In 
1694, with the same number of tax payers, her list had fallen to 

^1554. 

In May of 1693, Mr. Peck received from the colony "two hun- 
dred acres of land, for a farme." Whether this was a grant for 
special services, or a gratuity, does not appear. 

We learn nothing more of the house for the worship of God 
until 1694, when : 

The Town agree to use or improve the money that now is, or hereafter shall 
be due for wild horses* that are sold in the town. We say to improve it for help- 
ing to build the meeting-house, and to stand by the officers that sell them, and 
hereafter to allow those that bring in such horses one-half. 

How much aid the good cause received in this manner is not 
known. In 1694 the Court again granted Waterbury its country 
rate toward the finishing of the meeting-house, provided that the 
town should discharge to the country its indebtedness of the town. 
From this time, we find nothing regarding the church building 
until 1699. There is no proof that it was finished, or that Mr. Peck 
ever preached in it, and there is no proof to the contrary. It is not 
known at what date Mr. Peck became incapacitated for preaching, 
thus throwing a double burden upon the people, but in 1695 there 
was another minister to be considered, who is referred to, not by 
name, but as t/ie present minister, when the parsonage land was de- 
voted to his use. In 1696, and until the ordination of Mr. South- 
mayd, the children of Waterbury people were taken to other towns 
for baptism, Milford and AVoodbury being of the number. 

In 1696 Mr. Peck executed a deed of gift of all his property in 
Waterbury. He mentions six children, Samuel, Ruth Atwater (to 
whom he gave, among other books, "Ye Articles of y Church of 
England"), Caleb, Anna Standly, Jeremiah, and Joshua. In this 
deed, the lands that his son Jeremiah owned which had been given 
him by the town, were to be accounted as Reverend Jeremiah's 
lands, and to be equally divided between Jeremiah and Joshua. 
The house and home lot and the three-acre lot were exempt from 
this division, and bestowed upon Jeremiah. To Jeremiah also was 

* It must not be understood that •;(■//«' horses went roaming through the country. If a man neglected 
to brand his horses properly, he could not easily reclaim them, and in many instances branded horses were 
not reclaimed. Waterbury, it will be remembered, had a horse pasture, but the adjoining towns seem to 
have been without that useful adjunct, and the animals were apt to stray abroad, and were taken up, prop- 
erly advertised, and then sold. 



^,, HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

->)-+ 

g-iven the farm the General Court had granted. With his custom- 
ary regard for contingencies, he made the following conditions : 
" Y' Jeremiah and Joshua pay all my lawful debts, provide well and 
comfortably for me and my wife * * * as long as we both live, 
and if they fail or neglect their duty, I reserve y"^ power to sell the 
land for my relief." On behalf of his wife, in the event of his death, 
and the failure of his sons to provide well for her, and in case she 
should leave them during the time of her widowhood — bearing his 
name — he gave her power to command the use of one-third part of 
all the lands he had given to Jeremiah and Joshua. To his wife he 
gave, to be hers, after his decease, two cows and six sheep, with all 
"the movables within doors excepting a silver tankard," which 
went to Jeremiah. This will, of over three thousand words, proves 
that Reverend Jeremiah Peck to the end of his life continued an 
exceedingly careful and provident man. 

Mr. Peck lived nearly three years after the execution of this deed, 
but as an assistant had been required before it was made, and we know 
that the Rev. John Jones officiated at a later date, it is not probable 
that he was again able to perform public duties. He was placed in 
a trving- position, for while he yet lived, his church and people 
were eagerly, and with great enthusiasm, preparing- to receive his 
sticcessor. A young man, fresh from Harvard College, had won the 
heart of Waterbury and aroused it to a pitch of enthusiasm that 
makes itself felt through the dim pages of the old records. His 
name was Reverend John Read, and he was destined to become a 
brilliant and successful man, but Mr. Read was not destined for 
Waterbury. In vain they offered him their hearts and lands, and 
promises to build him an house with three chimneys, 38 feet long 
and 19 feet wide, with a stoned cellar and other elegancies of con- 
struction. To this, they added an annual salary of ^50 and ^20 in 
labor for two years, and after two years of service as an ordained 
minister, he was to receive one of the three grand propriety rights 
in the township. 

The town made great effort to secure John Carrington's house lot 
(Leavenworth street now runs through it), to put the new house 
upon, but his heirs declining to sell it, it was decreed to take off 
the obligation that lay upon the lot "at the West end " and "set the 
minister on it." The obligation was, that it had been sequestered, 
as school land. This lot at the " West end " is now Air. Robert 
Brown's corner at Willow street. 

It was while his people were making ready for another minister, 
that " on the 7th of June, 1699, the Reverend Jeremiah Peck ' left 
this world, in the 77th year of his age.' " His pastorate in Waterbury 
was a short and a serious one. It began and continued amid the 



THE FIRST CHUIiCII OF WATEBBURY. 235 

storms of war. The "great sickness" and the "remarkable flood," 
together with the "losses in live stock," and in "the fruits of the 
earth," (for Mr. Peck was a farmer as well as a minister), when 
combined with age and growing infirmities, must have made the 
active years of his life here full of care and anxiety. It is but a 
meagre record that we have given of this man. The finding is 
most unsatisfactory, but we are compelled to leave it thus. In cer- 
tain towns settled at an early date, it was the custom to bury the 
dead in the garden of the minister. Mr. Prudden's garden, at Mil- 
ford, is cited as an instance— and the first place of burial in our 
town was likewise at the foot of the minister's garden, for Mr. Peck's 
house lot extended through to Grand street, and the part of the 
late Grand street cemetery in use during the first century, was but 
a continuation of that house lot. It was probably within this time- 
consecrated ground on " Burying- Yard Hill," that Reverend Jere- 
miah Peck, after his long and useful life, was laid to rest, but no 
inscribed stone raised in memory of him remained when, in 1892 
the city of Waterbury dishonored itself by desecrating the graves 
of one hundred and seventy-six years; by blotting from the face of 
our fair township the last vestige of its founders ! Neither church- 
spire nor mill-chimney can ever be raised high enough to over- 
shadow this crime, committed against the generations gone, and the 
generations to come. Two weeks after Mr. Peck died the town en- 
gaged to pay money, or that which was eciuivalent at the place where 
Deacon Thomas Judd should buy "nayls," for the clapboarding and 
shingling the minister's house. Committee was added to committee 
in order to hasten the work — meanwhile, as an extra temptation, the 
coming minister was proffered ten acres of upland " where it could 
be found." A month later, Mr. Read was desired "to go on and accept 
the call to the work of the ministry on the terms propounded to him 
on the town's behalf," and an extra committee, composed of a lieu- 
tenant, deacon, ensign and sergeant, was desired to go on and secure 
Mr. Read if he was "obtainable;" but he was, evidently, not obtaina- 
ble, for sometime between July 18 and August 21, 1699, Mr. Read dis- 
appointed his devotees, and they turned away, much disheartened, to 
look for another minister, appointing Deacon Judd to make the 
search "by himself and the best counsel he could take to get one 
to help in the work of the ministry, and to bring a man amongst 
them upon probation, in order to settlement, if he could." The next 
month, Deacon Judd not having been successful, John Hopkins was 
appointed to give him aid in getting a minister. Ministers were 
not to be had for the asking, in the seventeenth century. October 
12th came, and a rate of a half penny on the pound was laid, to be 
paid in current silver money, or that which was equivalent, bearing 



236 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

its own charge to the inai'ket, for to buy nails and glass for the minister's 
house. During all this time, while the records are eloquent with 
effort regarding a minister, not a word appears in regard to the 
meeting-house, and are we to believe that the minister's house had 
glass in the windows, and the house of God none?* 

One of the latest acts of the century was the laying of "a rate of 
8d on the pound for carrying on the work of the minister's house, 
to be given in labor or provision pay," and. twenty days later, after 
the long silence, the following : " What charge Ensign (Timothy) 
Standly and Sarg. Bronson, committee for building the pulpit and 
seats in the meeting-house, are at, more than the money given in 
the country rate, and horse money according to the town act, shall 
be paid by the town." We may conclude then, that in 1700 the 
meeting-house had a pulpit and seats, or was about to be supplied 
with them. 

At the close of the century, seven of the original proprietors had 
died in Waterbury, Robert Porter and Philip Judd in 1689, Edmund 
Scott and John Carrington in 1690, Abraham Andrews, cooper, in 
1693, vSamuel Hikcox in 1694, and John Bronson in 1696. Two — Ben- 
jamin Jones and Joseph Hikcox— had died elsewhere. Five — Will- 
iam Judd, Thomas Hancox, Thomas and John Newell and Lieut. 
John wStanley — had returned to Farmington, and John Scovill had 
removed to Haddam — fifteen in all. If we add to this list those who 
died or left the town before 1681, we shall find that in 1700 less than 
one-half of the Grand Proprietors of the township remained. 
Before 1700 thirty young men, sons of the planters, had been added 
to the list of land owners. The whole number of tax-payers in 
October, 1699, was forty-seven. We close the century with the list 
of the planters' sons who had become land owners and had settled 
in the town; they being called Bachelor Proprietors in distinction 
from the Grand Proprietors, or sharers in the thirty-four divisions 
of the little republic of Waterbury. Nine sons of planters either 
died or failed to gain residence here between 16S1 and 1700. 

THE BACHELOR PROPRIETORS BEFORE 1700. 

Isaac and John Bronson, Clark Carrington, Joseph and John 
Gaylord, Samuel, William, Thomas and Joseph Hikcox, Thomas 
and John Judd, Deacon Thomas Judd, John Richards, John, Thomas 
and Israel Richardson, Edmund, Samuel, Jonathan, George, David 
and Robert Scott, John Scovill, Samuel Standly, John, Ephraim and 
Benjamin Warner, John, Stephen and Richard Welton. 

♦Twenty years after this church edifice was built, changes were made in it, and its doors and windows 
were repaired. At that time, the vote taken relating to the purchase of glass has led to the erroneous belief 
that the windows were without glass until 1715. 



CHAPTER XVIII. 

YOUNG MR. SOUTHMAYD HIS ACCEPTANCE BY THE TOWN ENSIGN TIM- 
OTHY Stanley's house to be fortified — "yards" — a new 

INHABITANT THE MEADOWS ALONG THE GREAT RIVER WATER- 
BURY ISLANDS WATERBURY HILLS. 

JOHN READ, while at Harvard College, had a classmate named 
John Southmayd. We are not able to assert that young Mr. 
Southmayd listened to the story told by his friend Read, of 
the generosity and needs of a poor and feeble little town in the 
wilderness, and was moved by compassion and other considerations 
to preach for its people — or that Mr. Read softened his refusal by 
sounding the praises of his friend, but both statements are made 
tenable by ensuing events. Dr. Bronson gives the following 
anecdote relating to the young men, which was told by Professor 
Hedge, of Harvard. Southmayd, while a student, prepared a chair 
which was so constructed that when a person sat down in it, it sud- 
denly gave way. When the Freshmen class was entered, its mem- 
bers one by one were invited to Southniayd's room and offered the 
treacherous chair. In the same class with vSouthmayd there was 
one by the name of Read, who was mischievous, and one Collins, 
who was dissolute. A wag, to hit off the three, composed some 
lines which ran thus: 

" Bless'd is the man who hath not lent 

To wicked Read his ear, 
Nor spent his life as Collins hath, 
Nor satin Southmayd's chair." 

We have seen how Waterbury lent its ear to this young and 
"wicked" Read— a man who became the most distinguished lawyer 
of his time in New England, and we are soon to see young vSouth- 
mayd become one of the most wise, sagacious, and beneficent sail- 
ing-masters that ever directed the three-decked ship of church, plan- 
tation, and town, safely over the shoals that beset its course. 

Before November 2, 1699, Mr. Southmayd had preached here. 
The two-acre house lot and other lands for the new minister were 
already cleared and fenced, and Samuel Hikcox and his brother 
William were appointed to go about and gather a work-rate of ^20, 
out of which they were to dig and stone a well. 

In June of 1700, it was announced in town meeting, that "having 
had some taste of Mr. ^out'ameats ministry the people were satisfied. 



238 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



and were willing- to accept him as their minister to dispense the 
word of God amongst them, and desired that the church in due sea- 
son should settle him in Gospel order amongst them." But Mr. 
vSouthmayd delayed to accept the duties of an ordained minister. 
We shall find the reason perhaps, in the following entry, under date 
of April 9, 1700. "The town agreed considering our present cir- 
cum.stances, to fortify Ensign vStandly's house for the safety of the 
town, and if it should prove troublesome times and the town see 
they have need and are able afterward, to fortify two more." At 
the same meeting "it was agreed to go about it forthwith." All 
men and boys and teams that were able to work, were to begin the 
next day, and the man who did not help with his own hands was to 
pay 2S 6d. or with his team 3s. a day, until the work was done. 

Until 1700, Waterbury was a compact village. The planters all 
had their houses at the town spot. ''Yards" are referred to as 
existing in localities cjuite remote from the centre. Abraham 
Andrews, Senior, had land " at Judd's meadows on the east side of 
the brook that runs into Benjamin Barnes' yard." Isaac Bronson 
had an acre for a yard very early at Buck's meadow. There was an 
"old" yard at Hancox meadow brook in 17 15. Mention is made of 
the spring and the place where they used to stack their hay west of 
the Long Boggy meadow in south-western Watertown. These are 
sufficient to indicate the custom of making yards for cattle, and 
stacking hay where it was made. 

To the present date, an attempt has been made to prison the 
chief events as they transpired, reflecting what light might sift 
through a score of decades upon them while the town was held as 
a single family — but from this point we must diverge with the 
diverging inhabitants, pausing only here and there to chronicle a 
passing event, as we follow our friends to Breackneck, Judd's 
Meadows, Buck's hill, and whithersoever they go to build, and 
abide, and subdue the wilderness. While we wait for the finishing 
of the meeting-house, and for young Mr. vSouthmayd to say "yes" 
to the town's wooing, and for the town to build that fort about 
Ensign Timothy Stanley's house, over whose site stands our City 
hall, it seems a fitting time to visit the meadows along the Naug- 
atuck, and give the names by which they were known by their 
owners, and by which certain of them are known to this day. On 
the way down the river we stop to mention an important event — 
the arrival of a new inhabitant, with a new name to add to the 
twenty-two, hitherto known in the town. He came, or he appears, 
in 1700 on the list of town-officers, as a fence viewer. His name is 
Joseph Lewis. 



MEADOWS, ISLANDS AND JIILLs. 239 

THE MEADOWS ALONG THE XAUGATUCK RIVER. 

Judd's Meadows included all the meadows reaching from the 
Straits at Beacon Hill brook, to Fnlling Mill brook at Union City. 
In the sub-division of these meadows, the division northward from 
the Straits on the east side of the river, extending from the brook 
to the hills northward and eastward, seems not to have been hon- 
ored with any name, except that the upper portion is known as Ben 
Jones's lot, and is often referred to as a starting point. One of the 
Newells had an allotment at the south end, bordering on the river 
and Beacon Hill brook at its mouth. This, later, was Jeremiah and 
Joshua Peck's, and they sold it to the new inhabitant, Joseph Lewis. 
Later, the Hopkinses bought it and the Jones allotment and all the 
surrounding region. On the west side the river, the first allotment 
was John Lankton's, bordered on the south by the great rocks, on 
the north by a little brook. This allotment became John Hopkins's. 
The Hopkins family retained these meadows until they became, by 
inter-marriage and deed of gift, Culver property, which they con- 
tinue to be. North of the little brook, Thomas Richardson's allot- 
ment began. It ran up into a neck between the hill and the river, 
and included an island. Richardson gave it to his son Thomas, and 
he sold it to Samuel Hikcox 2d, in the distribution of whose estate 
it was "set" to his daughter Sarah, who married John Piatt, of 
Norwalk. The Platts bestowed it upon a relative, Joseph Betts, 
about 1750. The land lay neglected until it "went to pieces " in 
Colony, Church and State taxes. The Culvers gathered in the 
pieces and added them to their farm. 

The next division west, became known as Scott's meadow from 
an allotment in it to Edmund wScott. Scott's meadow gave the name 
to that region, which it retains to this day. The Naugatuck Rail- 
road runs through this, as well as through Richardson's allotment. 
On Joseph Gaylord's meadow, the mill of L. & W. Ward stands. 
East of the river, Sargeant Hikcox had the southern-most allotment, 
of five acres, including an island. The old Waterbury and Derby 
highway crossed this island, long known as Hikcox i.sland, now 
Ward's island. In the meadow which ran on the east side of the 
river up to the old Burying Yard hill, John and Daniel Warner, 
Benjamin and Philip Judd, and Timothy Standly had part and lot. 
About against it on the west, began another section of meadow in 
which was Scott's plain. This meadow section extended from the 
hill south of Butler's brook, known as Toantic— as Scott's, and as 
Long Meadow brook— to near the present Naugatuck bridge, where 
it was to meet the "Deacon's Meadow" which is on the same side 
of the river. It was allotted to William Judd, father of Deacon 



240 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

Thomas, whose properly it became by virtue of the bestowment of 
the Plantation's committee. It is recorded in 1688 as eight acres, 
and extended from just below Maple street to the place where the 
hill meets the river, so that the Rubber mills on Maple street and 
the old passenger station of the Naugatuck railroad were built on 
the Deacon's meadow. The section on the east side of the river from 
burying yard hill to Fulling Mill brook was know as Warner's 
meadow. The owners in this area were Dr. Daniel Porter (who had 
a meadow and also a ten-acre grant from the town here), and Benja- 
min Judd. 

On the west side, at Union City, at the mouth of Hop brook, the 
land became known as Andrew's meadow, Abraham, Senior, having 
an allotment there. He bought of Mr. vSouthmayd a great lot allot- 
ment, and of John Welton,his division. It was here that he had his 
cattle yard. He also bought ten acres of Timothy vStanley. And- 
rew's island was a part of the great lot. This point brings us to the 
northern terminus of the Judd's meadows region. It is thought 
that Lieutenant Judd had a two-acre lot assigned him as early as 1677, 
and which he chose at Judd's meadows. In this allotment at this 
very early date, each man seems to have selected a warm, secluded 
spot with a stream running through it— perhaps with reference to 
its suitability for cattle yards. In 1679, when the region was pre- 
pared for allotments, this two-acre meadow of William Judd's was 
ignored or forgotten, and Abraham Andrew's portion encroached 
upon it. The difficulty was amicably adjusted, however, by Judd's 
getting Andrew's lot at Hancox's meadow. This would seem to 
account for the name of Judd's meadows in 1677 or '78. 

The vSlip, or the Long land, is the region now known as Platts' 
mills. The meadows at the point above Pine island were described 
as "at Dragon's point." Above Dragon's point, lies Long meadow, 
which name in modern days has crossed the river and is applied 
likewise to the line of narrow meadow lands along the river at Hope- 
ville. The Long ineadow region extended northward to the sand 
hills lately used by the Meriden railroad for the extension to meet 
the New England road. At and about the mouth of the Mad river 
lay Mad meadow. On the west side of the Great river, in present 
Brooklyn, was the Little meadow. In this Little meadow of the 
Past (owned in the present century by Ansel Porter, son of Colonel 
Phineas, and in our day by the late Charles Porter), lies all that part 
of the city bordering the river between Washington avenue and 
Riverside cemetery. 

On the east side, lay the Beaver meadows, or meadow. Its east- 
ern limit was Pine hill, removed about 1880. Great brook ran 



JIEADOWS, ISLA^''DS AND HILLS. 



241 



through it, also the passage to the fording place, now Bank street. 
Its northwestern bound was the line of coves that separated it from 
the Manhan meadows, while near the river it ended at the base of 
the eastern terminus of Hop Meadow hill. This hill extended to 
Bank street. The accompanying illustration presents the sections 
of the hill remaining in 1891. The meadow has been filled to the 
depth of six or seven feet. 




HOP MEADOW HILL. THE SECTIONS REMAINING IN ISqi. 



Hop meadow is southward and westward of the hill, between it 
and the river. The Manhan meadows began with the western 
border of the coves, and they extend to the point where the Nauga- 
tuck river, after receiving Steel's brook, bends to the eastward. 
This bend in the river forms the dividing line between Manhan 
meadows and Steel's meadow and plain. 

On the east side of the river above the mouth of Hancox brook 
lie the fine meadows bearing the name of Thomas Hancox. They 
extend northward to Mount Taylor. Above Mount Taylor on the 
west side of the river, lies Buck's meadow. Frost's bridge crosses 
the river against it. On oi:r way to Buck's meadow we have passed 
a long, narrow, crooked strip of land that in 1679 was set aside for 
a new inhabitant. It was estimated " as twelve acres, if it was there 
16 



242 



HISTORY OF WATERS [TRY. 



to be found." vSteplien Upson was the new inhabitant, and he " took 
it up." For many years it was known as Upson's island. The 
rocky hills near by were called Upson's Island rocks. Next, on 
the same side of the river lies Walnut-Tree meadow. Against it, 
where Daniel Carver now lives, a brook comes to the river, known 
in 1699 as George's brook. Following the river to Jericho rock, 
which is a hill on its east side, we pass on the same side, Standly's 




LOOKING DOWN UPON STEEL S MEADOW AND I'L.MN. 



Jericho (which it will be remembered was given to him because of 
the ''meanness of his allotments.") It is the first meadow^ above 
the Jericho bridge. West, on the river, a little above Standly's 
Jericho, lies Pine meadow proper. 

Next we come to the Reynolds Bridge station of the Naugatuck 
railroad, which lies in Judd's Jericho. The view of Lower Pine 



MEADOWS, ISLANDS AND HILLS. 



243 



meadow is taken in the Re3'nolds Bridge region, looking south- 
ward. The hill to the left is Jericho rock. s'tandly's" Jericho 
lies between the rock and Lower Pine meadow. Higher still, 
against the station, west of the river and of the West branch, lies 
what came to be known as Upper Pine meadow. Above the bridge 
is the Acre plain and Judd's slip. As you go up to the falls— the 

only fall in the river about Waterbury worthy of the name on 

the east side is Popple meadow, which still holds its old name. 
" The plain against the Popple meadow " lies across the river. 




PINE MEADOW, LOOKING SOUTHW.'VRD FROM REV.N'QLDS I'.KIDGE, 



Above, on the west side, at the base of the Pine mountain, 
extending up toward the mouth of Pootatuck brook, is an extensive 
level meadow which appears to have had no distinctive name at the 
first and probably became consolidated with Twitch Grass meadow, 
which originally was a small meadow at the mouth of Twitch Grass 
brook, which formed one side of the ancient burving-varcl at 
Thomaston. 

The meadow lands above, on either side of the river, appear to 
have been nameless, until the station and bridge at Thomaston are 
reached. On the west side, the meadow extending up to the dam, is 
Andrew's meadow of 1688. The land by the station is spoken of as 
the plain against Andrew's meadoAv. Above the dam. on the west 
of the river, is a piece of land known as Welton's meadow. A plain 



^44 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



against that, where the railroad runs, is referred to as the plain 
against Welton's meadow. Above, on the east side at the month of 
the East branch, or Lead Mine brook, lies English Grass meadow. 
Above and against it, were "the mines." Still northward lies the 
meadow spoken of as the Plum Trees. 

Just above the Two-and-a-half-mile bridge, about half way 
between Campville and Thomaston, on the east side of the river, 
about a fourth of a mile from the bridge, is a house which is near 
the old town line of Hartford and Waterbury, before Harwinton 
was. In passing up the river road on the west side this house can 
be seen in the distance. 




JERICHO ROCK AND BUCK S MEADOW MOUNTAIN. 

The jioint where the Indians are supposed to have seen Joseph Scott in the meadow. 

We have thus followed the meadows bordering on the Naugatuck 
from "The wStraits " to "The Plum Trees "—a distance of about 
eighteen miles. 

WATERBURY ISLANDS. 

There were twelve islands in the ancient township. They all 
lay along the Great river. The most southern one was Richard- 
son's, at Judd's meadows. Hikcox island is now Ward's island. 
Andrew's island, now waste land, lies against the mouth of Hop 
brook. Pine island is in the bend of the river, where it is well 
wooded, just above the mill dam of the Piatt's mill. At an early 
date, the river rapids at this point were known as the Pine Island 
falls, and the elevated land west of the river was Pine Island plain. 



MEADOWS, ISLANDS AND HILLS. 245 

early owned by the Porters. In the same vicinity Isaac Bron- 
son and John Carrington had their eight-acre lots, and on the old 
road west of the river vSamiiel Barnes settled in 1730; on the east 
side was Pine Island spring (later the Widow's spring, from its 
ownership by the widow of vSergeant Samuel Hikcox). vSonth- 
mayd's island was originally his Beaver meadow allotment of three 
acres, probably islanded by the old long cove and the small run of 
water that came down AVillow street and ran through the line of 
coves to the river. In 1810 Southmayd's island had grown to eight- 
een acres ; bounding east on heirs of Stephen Bronson, south on 
Hop Meadow hill, westward on the Cove and a pent highway, 
north on the burying ground and highway. The small island near 
Sled Hall brook seems to have been nameless. The island lying 
at the north end of the Manhan meadows, at the point where the 
water is diverted from the river to enter the Manhan canal, was 
known as Gaylord's island. Lake Hubbard, which is an enlarge- 
ment of the river at this place encloses the island. This, at a later 
date, became known as Upson's island. The turn in the river at 
this point has been attributed to the work of the beavers, causing 
the river to cross the valley to its opposite side. The old river 
channel is still to be seen. Gaylord's upper island is between 
Joseph Welton's house and Waterville. It was described, in 1687, 
as "2;^ acres lying in a cind of a half mone at the lower end of 
Hancox Meadows." 

Bronson's island has been omitted from its proper place. It lies 
between the river and the Watertown road just above the present 
West Main street bridge. In time of a freshet this is still an island. 
It was a permanent island as late as 1752. 

Opposite the Waterville station of the Naugatuck road is a pro- 
jection of land that formerly was an island ; it has borne the name 
of its owners — Bronsons, and it is believed to have been early 
Scovill's island. Just above, is " The Little Island " of the Bron- 
sons. Above Mount Taylor on the east shore of the river is the 
long, slender strip of an island, dedicated in 1679 to the settler who 
should come and make a good inhabitant. This is Upson's island. 
He was to have twelve acres of meadow here, if it contained so 
much. Thomas Hancox owned two islands. The first one lay next 
his eight-acre lot at the mouth of Steel's brook. The second is 
enclosed by the two junctions of the West Branch river with the 
Naugatuck at Reynolds Bridge; and is now estimated at about 
fourteen acres. These islands acquired their names from the occu- 
pation of their owner, Thomas Hancox being a butcher. This is 
made evident by a deed of John Standly, wherein it is called "The 



246 



HISTORY OF WATERS UR v. 



Butcher's Island." After Hancox went to Hartford and became 
keeper of the prison there, the upper island belonging- to him was 
long a landmark as Ensign Judd's island. At a later date it bore 
the Welton name. Mr. Henry Reynolds is, I think, the present 
owner. 

THE HILLS OF WATERBURY. 

While we have not room to tell of the meadows that lie along the 
branches of the Great river, we may invite the possible reader to 
accompany us to that fair and beautiful hill-top lying beyond Town 
Plot — called ]\Ialmalick before it was seen of white men,* and from 
whence the planters beheld their township of nameless hills, in the 
summer of 1674. Here, we may clothe a few of the same hills on 
which these steadfast, earnest men fought the strife of life, with 
the names their lips and deeds framed the picture in. 

Looking northward, we trace the valley where the Naugatuck 
river penetrates the great circle and unites with Hancock brook. 
To the eastward, clearly cut against the blue, we see the " Blew Hill " 
of early days; now the Hanging hill of Meriden. To the south- 
ward, the dark pines and the crowding heights reveal the place 
where the Great river enters the narrow and solemn pathway that 
leads it out of the township. To the westward, the white church 
of Middlebury is seen. Truly it is a hill-country that we look 
upon, simple, and solid, and sober in its every line ! As seen from 
this point, few are the marks that man has placed upon the 
circle. 

Beginning at the Strait between Beacon hill and the " Straights " 
mountain, and moving westward, we pass Naugatuck, Great hill, or 
Gunn hill — where Isaiah Gunn lived — Twelve-Mile or Andrew's hill. 
Gunn Town, Millville, Toantick hill, in Derby. Woodruff's hill, 
Lewis's, Clark's, Joe's, and " King " Beebe's hills. Osborne Town. 
Sandy, Bedlam, Meshaddock and Camp's hills. Bradleyville. The 
hill west of Hop swamp. Middlebury, The Great hill east of Quass- 
apaug (so named in the earliest boundary of the town), Bissell's hill. 
The White Deer Rocks, Break Neck, Three-and-a-half-mile, Oronoke, 
and Two-and-a-half-mile hills, Garnsey Town lands, Jeremiah's 
mountain, Edmund's new mountain, Gaylord's hill, Warner's moun- 
tain. World's End rocks, Scott's mountain — now called Nova Scotia 
(and probably dating from the departure of certain inhabitants 
after the war of the Revolution to that place), Welton's moun- 
tain, Arnold's hill. Buck's meadow mountain, Hikcox mountain, 
Bryant's hill, Richard's hill, Edmund's Old mountain. Mount Tobe, 
or Mountobe. 



*See pages 198 and 199. 



MEADOWS, ISLANDS AND BILLS. 247 

Where the Naiigattick river enters, we find ]Moiuit Taylor, and 
Taylor's Meditation, Wool rocks, Drum hill, Manhan Meadow hill, 
World's End, or Lewis' hill, Buck's, Burnt, Grassy, Clinton and 
Spindle hills— while near by are West Side hill and Town Plot — 
Patucko's Ring- hill. Mantoe's House rocks, Chestnut, Long- and 
Round hills, Tame Buck hill, Benson's hill (now Wolcott), Meriden 
hill. East mountain, Abrigador, Prospect, and the Great hill. South- 
eastward lie unknown hills, with the West Rock range in the dis- 
tance, while nearer lie Hopkins' Pond, and Mulberry hills, with 
Bethany, the Reare hill; and the Beacon Cap on Beacon hill to close 
the door of the township on its Derby side, and complete the great 
circle of hills. 



CHAPTER XIX. 

TOWN OFFICERS IN 1700 SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL LANDS CANDLE WOOD 

POUNDS — THE MEETING HOUSE MR. SOUTHMAVD'S HOUSE LOT 

THE DEATH OF LIEUTENANT JUDD AND OF OBADIAH RICHARDS 

FIRST HOUSE IN WATERTOWN— AT BUCK'S HILL — IN MIDDLEBURV — 
AT JUDD's meadows MR. SOUTHMAYD's ORDINATION — FORTIFICA- 
TIONS AND EVENTS DURING QUEEN ANNE's WAR PRIOR TO 1709. 

THE year 1700 was ushered in with the following- men in power: 
Timothy Standly was the constable; John vScovill, Dea. Judd 
and Benjamin Barnes were townsmen; Edmund vScott and John 
Warner viewed the fences, and Robert vScott the chimneys; Stephen 
Upson and Richard Porter were the hay wards; Dr. Porter surveyed 
when there was occasion; Joseph Gay lord, Jr., collected the minis- 
ter's rates; Thomas Judd, Jr., was town treasurer and town clerk; 
and Benjamin Barnes made the graves. These men were elected 
for the year on the iSth of December, 1699, at the same meeting in 
which we meet for the second time a reference to a school in Water- 
bury, and at which the recorder was directed " to record those grants 
of lands that were in the old town book that stood fair to be taken 
out, even though the date was torn off." The old town book here 
referred to was doubtless the one of which we have a portion. Its 
successor seems to have been the present first volume of town meet- 
ings, and as that begins with page 98, and at this date, it indicates 
that the book called the Proprietors' book numbered 97 pages. 

The first allusion to a school in Waterbury is met in 1698, when 
the town granted thirty shillings in addition to the last year's rent 
of the school lands for the encouragement of a school for four 
months, and a committee was chosen to " procure one to keep school 
to teach in writing as well as reading." It is surprising that no 
school is mentioned for a period of sixteen years, for pupils abounded 
from the beginning of the town. Some radical change in the schools 
must have taken place about the time of Mr. Peck's death. It is 
probable that his son, Jeremiah, taught the school from 1689 to 1698. 
After the latter date, the school is mentioned every year in the 
town ineetings. 

"The rent of the school lands," referred to lots in Hancox, Mun- 
han, and Buck's meadows, and one in the Neck. These were leased 
in 1 701 and the four succeeding years, as follows: The Hancox 
meadow lot in 1701 to John Welton for p^i. 15.00; in 1702 to Dea. 



DURING QUEEN ANNE'S WAF. 249 

Judd for /J"i.o9.oo; in 1703 to John Ricliason for making ten rods of 
new fence and 4 shillings; in 1704 to Thomas Richason for j£i.ig.oo. 
The Munhan lot was leased at sums varying from 5 to 8 shillings — 
the Neck lot for about the same sums, while the Buck's meadow lot 
brought prices varying from _;^i. 04.00 to ^^1.13.00. The total income 
derived from the four lots in five years was ;^i5.o8.oo. In no instance 
do we find the same man in possession of the same lot two years in 
succession. Fourteen men leased the lots during the period named. 

In 1701 "For men's trial to make candle wood " the town gave 
" liberty to each inhabitant to try one tree apiece and that man who 
should pull a pine tree and set the two first letters of his name on 
it, fairly to be seen, it should give him the title to it as his own 
estate." If a man " felled boards, logs, timber, or wood and let it 
lie at the stub for a twelve month " it was " to be free for any that 
would fetch it." 

This was the period when pounds were established, and horses 
or cattle tied in the corn fields except when kept by a keeper on his 
own land or with leave from the land owners, were to be impounded 
by the hay wards. The first pound was " set up " where the Water- 
bury Bank building now stands. It was then a portion of the South 
highway, and the pound was placed in it because the South Meadow 
gate opening into the Common field was in the Common fence at the 
south side of Grand street. The second pound w^as in Willow street 
at West Main for a similar reason— the West Meadow gate into the 
field was there. 

In 1702, ten years after its foundations were laid, the first meet- 
ing-house was finished. This we learn from the orders given to 
the townsmen to make up their accounts concerning the work, and 
the appointment of a committee in July 1702 "to place the people 
where they should sit in the meeting-house." In order to under- 
stand this long delay we must keep in mind the condition of the 
people during the ten years. The same conditions existing to-day 
would defer the completion of the church edifice now newly begun 
in our town for a much longer period. Destroy our manufactories 
or render them absolutely useless for two or three years; add a war 
in a neighboring State that threatened our town with destruction; 
fill the woods on all the hills with signs and shadows of lurking 
Indians; send forth our military companies to keep the peace in 
New York State; then add typhoid fever until it entered nearly 
every house in the city and attacked the larger part of its inmates 
— and church-building would languish in (wr midst — and yet, 
from a like condition, the early men and women of Waterbury 
came forth to take the places assigned to them in the finished 



2^0 HISrORY OF WATERS URY. 

meetino'-house of 170:?. It stood about in the centre of the present 
Green, with its main entrance on the soiith side. The reason for 
placino- it so far to the westward is found in the knowdedge that 
the second meeting-house, begun in 1727, was placed east of the 
first one, and the third, built in 1795, east of the second one. Its 
floor space must have been sufiicient to seat about 300 persons. 
It had doors on its east, west, and south sides; a pulpit and seats, 
but no pews. There is no reason for thinking that its windows 
were without glass. The Jirst " seating " of the first meeting-house 
is not known; the only item that is left to us regarding it is — that 
Mr. vSouthmayd's seat was at the west end of the pulpit. This 
church edifice, unchanged, sufificed the people for six years only. 

It is interesting to learn just what was expected of the pastor of 
this, and other churches in 1702, and what was meant by "an able 
and orthodox minister of the gospell," for we may thus obtain a 
glimpse of Mr. Southmayd's acquirements at the age of twenty-six 
years. Fortunately for us, the General Assembly defined "an able 
and orthodox minister" that very year, enabling us to assert that 
John Southmayd was a person well skilled in arts and languages; 
well studied and well principled in divinity; that he approved him- 
self, by his exercises in preaching the gospel, capable of dividing 
the word of truth aright, and of convincing "gainsayers"; and that 
his conversation was such that he was a person called and qualified 
to be pastor of a church according to gospel rule— for such were 
the qualifications demanded of him by The Assembly, and by pas- 
tors and teachers of neighboring churches. To this young man 
the legal voters of Waterbury, numbering fifty-two persons, and 
whose combined estates were estimated at ^2050, promised to give 
^^50 in provision pay and ^10 in wood annually, with "^40 in labor 
for fencing and clearing his house lot and other lands." Not yet 
content with its own liberality, the town added ^5 to his salary, 
and the promise to bestow upon him the house that had been begun 
for Mr. Read, with lands and the propriety in lands — in fact, a great 
lot with all its belonging.s, " when he should become an ordained 
officer in the church"; the only condition being that the propriety 
should revert to the town in case "he should go away before two 
years w^ere out after his ordination." 

From the beginning, the people had not been satisfied with the 
house lot for their minister, and now they were anxious to secure 
the lot lying to the eastward. John Scovill was the person selected 
to achieve the desired result, and his endeavors attest his ability 
as a diplomat. The original Southmayd lot, together with the 
Abraham Andrews and the John Welton lots occupied the land 



DURING QUEEN ANNE'S WAF. 251 

lying- between present State and Willow streets. The town owned 
land in vSteel's meadow that had been sequestered for the ministry. 
Thomas jiidd owned the Andrews lot, represented by the home- 
stead of the late George Prichard. John and William Bronson 
owned an interest in the homestead of their father, John Bronson, 
lying across the highway. The town conveyed the ministry land 
in Steel's meadow to John Bronson; John Bronson promised to buy 
of the heirs their interest in his father's homestead* and give it to 
William. On this promise, William conveyed the house and lot to 
Thomas Judd, Jr. Thomas Judd, Jr., conveyed the Andrews home- 
stead to the town, and the town added it to Mr. Southmayd's two 
acres. 

There is no mention of any other minister at Waterbury during 
the time between Mr. Southmayd's first arrival and the time of his 
ordination five years later. It is not easy to account for this long- 
delay. During its first year Mr. Southmayd married Susanna, the 
daughter of William Ward, deputy to the General Assembly from 
^Sliddletown. The next year, in 1702, his father, William South- 
mayd, mariner, died, and Waterbury lost two more of her Grand 
proprietors— Lieutenant Thomas Judd,t the first resident Commis- 
sioner and Justice of the Peace, and the first lieutenant in the 
township; and his next door neighbor, Obadiah Richards, who was 
the first man, so far as has been found, to build a house and barn 
away from the town spot. The death of these men must have been 
a serious blow to the town, for the one held important positions of 
trust and responsibility, and the other was an earnest, a brave, and a 
practical planter. In the midst of war and danger from savage 
foes, Obadiah Richards built the first house in present Watertown 
before Dec. 23, 1700, for on that day he was granted one acre, "where 
his house stands at his /noinitain,'' and on the same day his son Oba- 
diah was received as an inhabitant. 

It is highly probable and entirely reasonable to suppose that 
Obadiah Richards, Jr., who was the first known inhabitant of 
Watertown, was living there in 1701. 

Richards' mountain, or Obadiah's hill, is the eminence southwest 
of the centre. The Middlebury and Woodbury roads pass over it. In 
1701, Richards gave to his sons John and Obadiah, each one-half of 
his lands on the mountain (above sixteen acres), and to Obadiah, 
his share of the house and barn. John, apparently, having assisted 



* That he kept his promise is evidenced by the fact that eight years later the homestead was set to Will- 
iam Bronson as his whole portion in his father's estate. 

•(■ A little paper lying unheeded for 188 years tells us that Dr. Hull came from Wallingford to attend Lieu- 
tenant Judd in his illness, and that before 1705 his son Thomas paid Dr. Hull at his house five shillings in 
cash on his " father's account." 



252 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

in the building of this house and barn, was the owner of the other 
half. The house is mentioned in 1704, and again in 1709, but in 17 15 
some disaster had befallen both house and barn, for we find in a 
land grant the words " where the house and barn stood." Houses 
and barns did not wear out in fifteen years. It is not to be thought 
that Obadiah Richards continued to live in this isolated habitation 
when the peril was so great that only the edict of the General 
Court, commanding towns to stand and fortify, prevented wholesale 
flight to points of greater safety, and it is highly probable that the 
house and barn were burned in the Indian raid of 17 10, which vis- 
ited Waterbury with a calamity that was long felt. 

Bucks Hill is probably the scene of the second attempt to build 
homes at a distance from the village. The brothers John and 
Ephraim Warner (probably twins) were, it is believed, dwelling- 
there at the close of 1701 in houses separated by the highway; 
John's house was on the west side and is now fairly well repre- 
sented by William Tyler's residence; Ephraim's, on the east side, a 
little southerly from the Tyler house. The depression supposed to 
indicate the cellar of the latter house was obliterated in 1891. The 
two houses supposed to have been built in 1701 are not specifically 
mentioned until 1703. 

Before April of 1702 Isaac Bronson had built the first known 
residence in present Middlebury. 

Before December of that year Samuel Hikcox had "set his 
house " in Naugatuck. 

The initial steps had thus been taken for the establishment of 
three towns in 1702, and the events narrated had taken place before 
the first meeting-house was finished, or Mr. Southmayd was ordained. 

October 7, 1703, Isaac Bronson, Thomas Judd, and Edmund wScott 
were chosen '' to provide what was needful for the entertaining the 
elders and messengers for the ordaining Mr. Southmayd." If the 
feast was made ready and the guests arrived, the ordination did not 
take place that year, nor even the next year. Peaceful avocations 
were rudely interrupted. The fort about Timothy Standly's house 
was rebuilt; Timothy was elected lieutenant of the Waterbury train 
band, and Deacon Judd was made its ensign; the town stock of 
ammunition was received from Hartford and kept in the Standi}'' 
fort; a garrison of ten men was stationed here by order of the 
General Assembly; the town agreed to fortify Mr. Southmayd 's 
house, "every man's proportion to be staked out according to his 
Grand levy;" every sixth man in the train band was provided with 
a knapsack hatchets and a strong belt, and no man (of sixteen 
years or older) was permitted to leave Waterbury unless he con- 



DUBI^''G QUEEX ANJYE'S WAR. 253 

tributed ^10 for the defence of the place, and every man of sixteen 
years was a member of the train band. 

In 1704, Mr. Southmayd declined to accept the ^^5 addition to his 
salary, which was to be in the same " speci " — that was, in provision 
pay. Not to be outdone in generosity the town decreed to give 
him ^£^10 in labor — thus making his salary at his ordination ;^7o, 
beside a free gift of his house and a. ^i^o interest in what was orig- 
inally about one twent^'-second part of a township of more than one 
hundred and twenty-five scjuare miles — a fair salary and settlement 
for the most distinguished clergyman of the present time! May 30th, 
1705, Mr. Southmayd was ordained over a church of twelve male 
members. It was a solemn, a serious, and an awful height to which 
a man was raised, when he became " a visible member of the Church 
of Christ" at any time from 1630 to' 1740, in New England. The 
marvel is, that so many as twelve men were found in Waterbury to 
assume the enduring ordeal to life and character. The relation of 
pastor and people became annealed in the fires of danger through 
which together they passed. There is not from first to last the 
slightest indication in the public records that the town and Mr. 
Southmayd were ever at variance. He was the standard-bearer of 
public opinion on all vital points; a certain mellow ripeness of per- 
fect manhood seems to emanate from his departed life; whatever 
he did in the church or in the town— for the two were but one— still 
bears the blush of perfect fruit. One, now and then, can get a 
glimpse of a side of his character that recalls the fact that his father 
let a negro boy escape out of his barcpie at Middletown— and sug- 
gests the possibility that the same spirit descended to the son; in 
fact, the breath of spiritual and material emancipation was vital in 
him. That house on the corner, in 1700 with "one end of it fit to 
live in," was rich in historical interest before, during, and after the 
days when it was fortified. 

It was declared that it "would greatly prejudice the interests of 
Queen Anne and encourage the enemy if any of the outposts in 
Hartford county should be ciuitted or exposed by lessening the 
strength thereof." Waterbury was accounted one of the eight 
frontier towns, and it was forbidden that it .should be broken up. 
That it might be enabled to stand, a garrison of ten men was 
ordered to be stationed here, and a scout of two men was to be on 
duty every da}'. 

Before 1706 there was a call for 400 soldiers from Hartford 
county alone, to go forth to war with the English forces. Already 
Queen Anne's war had been waged for four years, and the burden 
and horrors of it fell upon New England. Waterbury had received 



2^4 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

one poor afflicted refugee in the person of Sergt. John Hawks, who 
sought the home of his daughter, ]\Irs. Jonathan vScott, after having 
survived the massacre at Deerfield,in which Frenchmen and Indians 
killed his wife, his only son and his wife with their three children, 
and carried captive and killed his daughter Elizabeth. Sergt. Hawks' 
cattle were taken out of the "Waterbury list in 1706, and Dr. Bron- 
son tells lis that he spent his latter days here. 

In 1706, the fort about Standly's house was repaired by Doctor 
Porter and Thomas Jtidd. A period of the wildest alarm and most 
ao'onizing suspense followed. It was incited by a messenger from 
Colonel Schuyler at Albany with the information that the " French 
and enemy Indians were preparing to make a descent upon the 
frontier towns." This was in January, 1706-7. Waterbur}- was one 
of the four most exposed towns. At the same time Captain Minor 
sent a messenger from Woodbury to the Council conveying his 
suspicions that the Indians thereabout had been invited to join the 
enemy. An examination of the Indians, who were summoned be- 
fore the Council, confirmed Captain jNIinor's suspicions into belief. 
It was resolved to remove the Indians of Woodbury and New Mil- 
ford to vStratford and Fairfield; but later, as there was "much sick- 
ness among them," two of their chief personages were taken to 
Fairfield and held as hostages. Waterbury was warned to provide 
wath all possible speed a sufficient number of well fortified houses 
for the safety of the inhabitants. The Council "resolved" that this 
exposed town must have three houses fortified, and promised 10 use 
its influence with the General Assembly that the charges for the 
same should be borne by the country. Fifteen pounds was later 
allowed Waterbury out of the country rates for that year, in consid- 
eration of the extraordinary floods that had occurred. 

The immediate response to this warning appears in our records 
under date of January 31, 1706-7, when "the town agreed to build 
the fort that is at Lieut. Standly's, strong." An act was also passed 
"to build a new fort at the east end of the town at the place where 
they could agree." They did not seem to agree about the place for 
the new fort, for the following June, probably as the result of a 
local alarm, " the town by vote considering our troubles and fear of 
an enemy do agree to lay aside cutting bushes which was warned 
for this day (June 23d) till after ^lichaelmus, and this day forth- 
with to go about finishing and repairing the forts and to finish 
them by Wednesday next at night." If there was a third fort at 
this time, we have no intimation of its location. This was soon 
after the expedition of one thousand men, in twenty-three trans- 
ports, had set sail from Nantucket for Port Royal. During the 



DUlilNO QUEEN ANNE'S WAR. 255 

time of that expedition the frontier towns were kept in alarm. In 
October of 1708 an expedition was fitting out against Canada, and 
the Council of War was directed to erect and sustain with men and 
provisions as many garrisons at Waterbury as it deemed necessary 
(but not more than two) at the colony's charge. It was at this time 
that "^50 was allowed for bringing up and maintaining Dogs in 
the northern frontier towns in the colony to hunt after the Indian 
enemy." A black clog, at about this time, is a factor in a deed in 
exchange for land in Waterbury which may have figured in the 
Indian hunts. It is interesting to note that in the midst of all this 
dread excitement and danger the Reverend Ministers in the gov- 
ernment met at vSaybrook to utter their confession of faith on the 
platform of Church Discipline there erected. 

Our own records afford no intimation that a garrison was ever 
stationed here, but in November 1708 we find the following act: 
" The town agree to have three forts in the town, one built at the 
west end of the town on the country accotnit — one at Lieut. Stand- 
ly's on the country account — one at John Hopkins's house on the 
town account."* In December, it was announced that the fort at 
the west end of the town should be built about ^Nlr. Southmayd's 
house. 

In view of the above records, it is not possible to give a definite 
and clear statement of the fortifications of Waterbury, for Mr. 
Southmayd's house had been fortified four years at the last men- 
tioned date, and the Stanley fort ante-dated that. Three months 
later " the town agree that the Fort to be built at the West end of 
the town shall be built about Mr. Southmayd's house." 

In 1708 fifty names appear on the Waterbury list of tax-payers. 
In 1709 we find but forty-three — a loss of seven names in one year. 

In May of 1709, in the list of troops to be raised for the expedi- 
tion to Canada, it is found that Waterbury's quota was four. In 
October, Queen Anne ordered the expedition to be "laid aside." 
Col. William Whiting commanded the Connecticut men. "Sorrow- 
ful circumstances " attended the expedition, and a post was sent to 
Col. Whiting directing him to take the best care that he could of 
the sick soldiers remaining at Albany; to provide for their return 
by water; and then to march home with such of his men as were fit 
for the journey. His men were to be disbanded at the towns from 



*The large red house of John Hopkins, standing on the south side of East Main street, between Great 
and Little brooks, with a well in the middle of its "enormous " kitchen, is remembered by persons still 
living, and is thought to be the house fortified in 1708. 

Some of the palisades of the Stanley fort were used in the construction of a fence about the house of 
Lemuel Harrison, which occupied the site of the Stanley-Clark homestead, and are still remembered by :Nriss 
Mary Ann Clark, a great-granddaughter of Thomas Clark. 



256 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



which they had gone forth. Certain of the soldiers were not 
returned to the places of their enlistment, and the dates of their 
discharge remained for some time unknown. Of this number was 
Nathaniel Richardson of Waterbury, a young man of about twenty- 
four years. 

He was "detached for the expedition to Canada, and he was dis- 
missed from service, being sick, at New Haven." Four years later, 
his heirs were awarded for his services to the country one pound 
and sixteen shillings. 

That Nathaniel Richardson returned to Waterbury is made evi- 
dent by the following entry in the Proprietor's book, under date of 
March 13, 17 10. By a major vote he was given four-score acres on 
a branch of Hop Brook east from Break Neck hill. For this, he 
was to live in the town in a settled way ten years and build a house 
in five years. To this gift, remonstrance was made by certain of 
the proprietors. 

The names of the three other soldiers who served on the expe- 
dition are unknown. 



CHAPTER XX. 

THE WILL OF THOMAS SCOTT OF HARTFORD THE GIFT-DEED OF 

EDMUND OF WATERBURY JOSEPH SCOTT " KILLED " BY INDIANS 

AT THE WEST BRANCH ROCKS HIS GRAVE HIS SON JOHN ADMIT- 
TED AN INHABITANT OF WATERBURY JONATHAN SCOTT CAP- 
TURED BY THE INDIAN ENE^MY AND TAKEN TO CANADA — JOHN 

SCOTT IN CAPTIVITY AMONG THE INDIANS AT CANADA HANNAH 

SCOTT, THE MOST AFFLICTED WOMAN IN NEW ENGLAND THE 

FRONTIER ROAD THROUGH WATERBURY. 

THE only Waterbury family known to have received personal 
injuries at the hands of Indians during all the long and bit- 
ter years of warfare is that of Edmund Scott. 

The Scott family seems to have been somewhat noted for mis- 
adventure from the days when Thomas Scott, the ancestor of the 
family, was chosen in the midwinter of 1639 to go and examine the 
country — or, in the words of the record, "to view those parts by 
Unxus vSepus," because Hartford desired more ample accommoda- 
tions, and Wethersfield also desired a plantation at Farmington. 
This Thomas Scott was, I think, the grandfather of Edmund of 
Waterbury. He died in 1643, while making his will in the presence 
of two friends who had been summoned in haste to receive his last 
words. "John Ewe, by misadventure, was the cause of his death" 
and paid a fine of five pounds, in consequence of his act what- 
ever it was, to the Court, and the same airaount to Thomas vScott's 
widow. 

In present Watertown there are two Waterbury graves that 
should be suitably inscribed and kept in perpetual remembrance 
because of the sufferings endured by their tenants at the hands of 
Indians; and also because they were the first permanent residents 
of Wooster-Westbury-Watertown. The graves are those of Jona- 
than and Hannah (Hawks) Scott. He was a survivor of Indian 
torture; and she was, probably, the most afflicted woman in all New 
England, for in 1704, her mother and her brother with his wife and 
their three children were .slain at Deerfield, while her only sister 
was made a captive and perished on the way to Canada. In 1707 or 
1708, within a few miles of her home in Waterbury, her husband's 
brother was tortured to death. In 17 10, her husband was seized in 
the Waterbury meadows, the thumb of his right hand was cut off, 
and thus mutilated, he was taken on the long and weary march to 

17 



258 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Canada, being bound at night to the earth by poles laid across his 
body, on the ends of which his savage captors slept. He was sub- 
ject to all the pains and penalties of two full years of captivity 
before his wife saw him again. Her son John, a lad of eleven years, 
was taken from her sight forever — it is said, on the same day, by 
the same cruel foe; and, if the tradition be true, her eldest son 
Jonathan, then thirteen years of age, was taken also; leaving Mrs. 
Scott — with her daughter Martha, a child of nine years, and three 
little boys, Gershom, seven; Eleazer, five; and Daniel, three — to 
brave life in Waterbury in 1710. Poor Hannah Scott ! Her sorrows 
should keep her in remembrance. 

Let us examine the evidence that has been collected regarding 
Waterbury's one Indian tragedy. Edmund vScott of Waterbury 
gave to his children nearly all of his property, by a deed of gift, 
executed June 11, 1690. This deed has been called his 7*;'/// — hence 
the error that has arisen in regard to the date of his death. In the 
distribution of his lands, he gave to Joseph, whom he calls his eld- 
est son, his twenty acres in the Great Swamp of Farmington, with 
its upland, and a four acre lot; to Edmund, beside what was for- 
inerly given to him, a lot in the Neck, and a fourth part of his 
undivided land in Waterbury; to Samuel and Jonathan, his "whole 
right and title in Farmington, of houseing, home lots, orchards, 
meadows, and upland." After gifts to his daughters — there was no 
incentive to a man to leave lands to his married daughters, for they 
could not hold them — he left to George, David and Robert, his 
whole property in Waterbury, including all his "movable estate, 
both qiiick and dead." This deed tells us why Samuel Scott left 
Waterbury, giving up his newly built house on Bank street, and his 
other lands, to his brother Jonathan. 

Three years later, Farmington gave to Joseph Scott, the eldest 
son, "a swamp of 14 or 16 acres, as a soldier's lot, and the same 
year the town measurer laid out for him two parcels of land " in 
the place called Poland (Bristol). One piece of nineteen and a half 
acres is described as "abutting southerly on the west branch of the 
Poland river, and running westerly up the river to a marked white 
oak tree near the northwest branch of the Poland river, and from 
the tree a straight line eastwardly to a tree marked on three sides 
and standing a little east of WattEberry path." The lands thus laid 
out to Joseph Scott had formerly been granted to John Langdon. 
Joseph Scott probably went to Bristol to live in the wilderness at 
this time, for we find the town of Fannington giving to him "a lib- 
erty to dwell alone, provided that he faithfully improve his time 
and behave himself peaceably and honestly towards his [Indian.?] 



TnE SCOTT FAMILY. 



259 



neighbors and their creatures." He was constantly to attend the 
public worship of God, and, when required, to give an account to the 
townsmen of the manner in which he spent his time. In 1695 we 
find mention made of "his cellar at Judd's meadow" in Farmington. 

Tradition* gives the following in relation to Joseph Scott. 
"Early in the history of the town [Bristol] a Mr. wScott who had 
begun to clear a piece of land on Fall Mountain, intending- to 
remove hither from Farmington, was seized by a party of Indians 
and horribly tortured. His screams were heard a long way; but 
the Indians were so many that no one dared to go to the rescue, and 
a considerable number of the settlers, fearing an attack from the 
infuriated Indians, hid themselves all day in the bushes near the 
river." 

The Mr. vScott of the tradition is, without doubt, Joseph vScott. 
He was "killed" twenty years before there were any known set- 
tlers in Bristol to hear him scream, or to hide bv the river bank, 
and he lost his life in Watcrbury, according to the following evi- 
dence. In 1758, Richard Seymour (Seamor) laid out about two 
acres of land at Reynolds Bridge, described as " at the West 
Branch rocks," and also as "near where Joseph wScott was killed." 
Stephen Seymour had land adjoining laid out at a still earlier 
date with the same description. 

In Joash Seymour's re-survey of a very large tract of land at the 
same place, it is described as " beginning at the foot of a ledge or large 

rock, which lies to the right 

of the path leading to the 
ancient Rock House, and as 
running from thence to the 
West Branch, and down the ^ 
Branch to the Naugatuck; 
down the river to Deep 
River brook to a branch 
of the brook and tip the 
branch to a highway, and 
through the wilderness ft? 
Scott's grave, and thence, 
through the wilderness, to 
the point of beginning." 

There are three rocks 
in this immediate vicinity, 
any one of which might be taken for the Rock house of the early 
days. In a meadow boundary, made before 1700, the Rock house 




THE ROCK HOUSE. 



♦Memorial History of Hartford County, Connecticut, iSS6, Vol. ii, p 44. 



2 6o BISTORT OF WATEBBUR7. 

was a bound, and the line was run from it, forty-seven rods to the 
river. The one selected for the illustration is capable of giving 
shelter to forty or fifty persons, and has been known in the Rey- 
nolds family for a century as the Rock house. Another and still 
larger ledge of the same description lies higher on the hill-side to 
the southwest. 

Joseph Scott was "killed" before Feb. 7, 170S-9, at which date 
administration on his estate was granted to his brother Samuel, and 
his grave is to this day a recognized bound of three farms; those 
of Henry Reynolds, Charles Bidwell and George Osborne. He 
seems to have had an only child, John, who, like poor John Hawks, 
fled to his kindred in Waterbury, after the death of his father, for 
"Dec. 28 1709, John Scott, son of Joseph Scott, deceased, was ad- 
mitted an inhabitant in said town " (Waterbury). According to 
this admission, he must have joined the expedition against Canada 
from Waterbury, for he was in Col. Whiting's regiment, and was of 
Waterbury at the date, although, having recently left Farmington, 
he was accredited to that place when five pounds was paid to him, 
in 1 7 10, for his services to the country. 

Dec. 28, 1709, Jonathan Scott was appointed one of four fence 
viewers. At some time between that date and July 26, 1710, he was 
"captured by the Indian enemy, and taken to Canada." In October, 
1710, and again in 1711, the country rates on his estate were remit- 
ted to his wife. In October, 17 12, he was "but lately returned from 
his captivity." He requested relief from the Court, and received 
" a release from his country rate, and ten pounds out of the treas- 
ury, for the loss of one of his thumbs by the enemy." While we 
can give no evidence that he was again captured, subsequent peti- 
tions point decidedly to that view of the case, for, after an interval 
of nine years, in 172 1, we find him again before the court, setting 
forth that "while he was a captive and prisoner at Canada, he was 
under distressing circumstances, and necessitated to take up money 
upon credit for his subsistence and relief, and had taken up ten 
pounds and prudently spent the same." The constable of Danbury 
was directed to pay ten pounds of the Colony's money into his 
hands. It seems probable that his son John was made prisoner 
about this time, for four years later, or fifteen years after the first 
capture, we find " the pra3^er of Jonathan Scott, setting forth that 
his son John is ncno in captivity among the Indians at Canada, and, 
that he is so reduced, that he cannot get him home." His prayer 
was answered by a gift of five pounds, and the promise, that if he 
recovered his son, the matter would be further considered, and the 
Assembly would do therein as it thought fit. That was Jonathan's 



THE SCOTT FAMILY. 261 

last prayer to the court, although he lived twenty years after that 
date. We find no proof that he recovered his son John, or that John 
ever returned from captivity. Notwithstanding- the traditional 
statement as given by Dr. Bronson, it seems quite probable that the 
stories of Joseph, of Jonathan, and of John, became intermingled 
by the lapse of j^ears, and that John's capture occurred during the 
period between 1722 and 1725, for at that time the very air was 
ringing with the alarms that shot along the frontier road — this road 
ran from Hartford through Farmington to Waterbury, and from 
Waterbury to Woodbury and New Milford. What more natural, 
when Major Talcott came "riding this frontier," impressing men 
and arms — on the news that three hundred " French Indians were 
come over the lake towards Connecticut " — than that a vScott should 
join the fray ? 

Life was far from being dull and wear}^ for want of in- 
citement, to our fathers. There was scarcely time to get the 
seeds in the ground, so incessant was the demand for scouts to be 
established. Militar}^ watches and constable watches were con- 
stantly in operation. The friendly Indians were all called in from 
their hunting grounds; not one being allowed to enter the territory 
lying north of the road that ran from Hartford through Waterbury 
to New Milford, and between the rivers Connecticut and Housa- 
tonic. Even an Englishman might not fire a gun within that ter- 
ritory to kill any animal. If a gun was heard to the northward of 
that road, the sound struck terror into every man, woman and child. 

Certain of the Litchfield settlers deserted that then new and 
defenceless plantation, until "the men of the coast" from Branford 
and Guilford; from Fairfield and Stratford and Milford, were sent 
to their aid. Even the few trusted Indians — the six who accom- 
panied a scout of three Englishmen — were obliged to wear some- 
thing white upon their heads to secure their lives from the wrath 
of white men. And these were the times in which the men of 
Waterbury made their town ! — the same men, whose graves the men 
of 1 89 1 had not the courage to face, and so despoiled them and hid 
them from sight forever. 

The following is the traditional story of Jonathan Scott's capture 
as related by Dr. Bronson. "About the same time (17 10) some In- 
dians came down from Canada and ascended a hill, or mountain, on 
the west side of the river, opposite Mount Tayler [the lower end of 
Buck's Meadow mountain], to reconnoitre. They saw Jonathan 
Scott seated under a large oak tree in Hancock's meadow, eating 
his dinner, with his two sons, aged fourteen and eleven, at a little 
distance. The Indians approached stealthily, keeping in a line 



2^2 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

with the tree and Mr. Scott. In this way they reached him unper- 
ceived and made him prisoner. The boys took to their heels; but 
the father, in order to save his own life, which he was given to un- 
derstand would be taken if he refused, recalled his sons Thus the 
three were captured. The Indians then retraced their steps rapidly 
with their prizes, having taken the precaution to cut off Scott's 
right thumb, in order to cripple him if he should make resistance." 
Dr. Bronson had met another tradition, for he adds, elsewhere, in 
relation to Jonathan Scott : " The tradition is that he was buried 
on Scott's mountain, and his supposed grave is still pointed out." 
It is evident that Joseph Scott's grave has been mistaken for that 
of his brother, for although Joseph was killed far from the eai-/y 
Scott's mountain, there is an eminence in the vicinity, to the west- 
ward of the grave, to which the name has been erroneously given. 
Bronson adds, "that part of the tradition, however, which relates 
to the circumstances and time of his death, as that he died by vio- 
lence on his way to the north, at the hands of the Indians, after 
having had his tongue cut out, is without foundation in fact." This 
tradition is probably entirely true oi Joseph Scott, of whom Dr. Bron- 
son failed to find trace. The entire facts may be and probably are, 
that Joseph was taken on Fall mountain, in Poland, and killed amid 
the West Branch rocks at Reynolds Bridge, in order to stay his 
screams, while on the retreat; that Jonathan Scott was captured in 
17 lo, and again at a later date, perhaps at the same time with his 
son John; but I have been able to find no evidence that John pre- 
ferred the life of the French Indians to a return to Waterbury— or 
that Jonathan Scott, Junior, was ever in captivity. Granting for 
one moment that the traditional story of the capture is entirely 
true, one finds it dithcult to resist the temptation to draw a picture 
of Waterbury on that summer's night, as its residents fled to their 
fortified houses to pass the hours of darkness — but we must confine 
ourselves to historical facts, and relate only that the Court in Au- 
gust, 1 7 10, in response to an appeal from Mr. Southmayd and others, 
appointed a Special Committee of War for Waterbur}', with full 
power to raise and send men thither from the county of New 
Haven for its relief by scouting or lying in garrison there, as 
occasion should require. From the date of Waterbury's cry for 
aid, we may place the capture of Jonathan Scott as probably July 
25, 1710. 

The following April, Waterbury was again suffering from appre- 
hension. 

At a town meeting in Waterburj', April 9th, 1711, the town made choice of Mr. 
John Southmayd, Lieut. Timoth\' Standly, Thomas Judd, John Hopkins. Serg. 



THE SCOTT FAMILY. 263 

Isaac Bronson, Serg. Stephen Upson, George Scott as a committee to write to the 
Committee of Safety at New Haven and to represent our case to said committee 
concerning our present fears of the common enemy to take their advice and counsel 
in said affair. 

It was comparatively easy to call a town meeting at that date, 
the majority of the inhabitants living" within sound of the beat of 
the drum — and " a writing on the meeting-house door with the hour 
and day asserted in said writing, 4 days exclusive before the day " 
was "the legal warning for a town meeting for Judd's Meadows, 
Break Neck, and Buck's Hill farmers" in 1709. A meeting must 
have been called in haste after the capture of vScott, for on the next 
day (July 26th), the town made choice of a committee, at whose head 
was Mr. vSouthmayd, and the poor recorder was so frightened that he 
wrote the naine "vSoth mad," "to draw up in writing the circum- 
stances of the town " in that time of war, and present it through 
their deputies to the General Court, which was to assemble at New 
Haven within nine days. This document is not known to be extant. 
At the same town-meeting, the town "gave Jonathan Scott his town 
rate for 1709, for getting out of town William ' wStanard's ' wife, and 
in consideration of his present circumstances, he being in captivity." 

In response to the appeal made by the town, the Court appointed 
a Special Committee of War for Waterbury, whose duty it was to 
respond to the call of Waterbury men in case of danger on the 
approach of an enemy, by sending " men for their relief " by scout- 
ing or lying in garrison "as occasion should require." 

The following April, Waterbury applied to the above committee 
of war for "advice and counsel in said affair." We get no hint of 
the occasion of the above appeal except that it was because of 
"present fear of the common enemy." 



CHAPTER XXI. 

THE FENCE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE CiREAT RIVER— FIRST DIVISION 

NORTHWARD FIRST DIVISION SOUTHWARD SECOND DIVISON 

NORTHWARD— SECOND DIVISION SOUTHWARD THREE ROD DIVISION 

THE FENCE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE GREAT RIVER. 

THE early settlers of New England came to America thoroughly 
imbued with the spirit of law and order. Every possible 
condition of community-living was anticipated and prepared 
for in England before a ship sailed for Massachusetts Bay, and but 
four years had elapsed after the landing at Plymouth, before cattle 
were brought to the new country— accordingly, when the pilgrims 
sallied forth for the Connecticut wilderness we find them driving 
cattle before them. 

We have also found that "the settlers of Mattatuck were not a 
mere band of adventurers bound together by a common purpose and 
a common sympathy, nor yet a confederacy of independent individ- 
uals, at liberty at any time to withdraw from the general govern- 
ment voluntarily submitted to, but that they were pre-eminently a 
unit in regard to social, political, and religious matters. It was not 
each man's privilege to select for himself a portion of land on 
which to found a home and raise sustenance for his family, but the 
major vote of those men who were cjualified to act determined 
where each one should pitch his tent, as it were, and where he 
should be privileged to expend his efforts to produce corn and 
wine, or the other good things of this life. "When each man's van- 
tage ground had been duly carved out for him, he could not build 
upon it such a domicile as he liked, and reside upon it when it 
suited him to do so, but in all things he was subject to the rule of 
others, whether he would or would not. In like manner, he must 
not choose for himself what form of religious worship he would sus- 
tain, or whether he would support any form, but must submit to the 
governing voice of others in this, as in minor matters."* 

In view of the above orderly and dignified arrangement, it is 
interesting to witness the extreme caution and care with which the 
colonists approached a condition incident to the new life, and for 
which they had no precedent in English living. When the neces- 
sity lay before them "in their beginnings " to improve their land in 

* B. F. Howland. 



THE COMMON FENCE. 



265 



a common way that should best advance the public good, it was 
ordered that each town "should choose seven able and discreet 
men, who were to take the common lands belonging- to each of the 
towns into sad and serious consideration, and after a thorough 
digesting of their own thoughts, they were to set down under their 
hands in what way the lands might in their judgment be best 
improved for the common good." If five men in any one town 
agreed on the way of improvement suggested, that agreement 
decided the law for that town. The same committee was also to set 
down what fences should be made. "When a fence was made, and 
viewed and approved by five out of the seven men, it was deemed a 
sufficient protection to the fields, and if any cattle thereafter sur- 
mounted that fence and damaged crops, the owner of the cattle was 
compelled to make good the loss, "without any gaynesaying or 
releife by Repleivy or otherwise." 

As time went on, the inhabitants had liberty to choose each 3-ear 
three new men as fence viewers, and the former committee was 
reduced to five members — penalties and forfeitures being under its 
control. 

In 1662 the orders concerning the viewing of common fences 
had fallen into neglect. To remedy this neglect, the Court then 
ordered that every town — the number of towns had increased to 
twelve (this was before the union with New Haven Colony) — 
should choose two men, each year, who should be sworn to a due 
performance of the work of fence viewing; refusal or neglect being- 
punishable with a twenty-shilling fine. It was at about this time 
that the order was given concerning the setting down of fences in 
meadow, and upland, and home lots, that gave liberty for either 
party of twelve inches from the dividing line, for breaking ground 
to set the jDosts, or " for the laying on the hedge," while the stakes 
and posts were to be placed in the dividing line. In the uplands, a 
liberty of four feet from the dividing line was granted for a ditch. 

To the committee for Mattatuck was consigned the duty of 
establishing the common-field, and the common-fence. To protect 
the treasures of grass and grain from wandering or unruly cattle, a 
portion of this fence was built at a very early date. This must have 
been made to enclose the acre-gardens clustered about the Neck 
hill, and as every man must have had an equal length of fence, 
there seems to have been no record of it — at least, none has been 
found. The first recorded division of fence was ordered in 1677 
It began at the Mad river, near, if not at the point where the Bald- 
win street bridge crosses it; from thence it ran westwardly and 
northwardly, bounding the town plot of 1677 on two sides (Union, 



266 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 




STEEL S MEADOW ALONG THE RIVER. 



Grand and Willow streets imperfectly representing its course). It 
followed the general course of Willow street as far north as that 
street now extends. It there bent to the westward, crossed David's 
brook (named for David Carpenter), went along the western base 

of Drum hill, and froin 
r^^' ="^ ^^-^-^^^^"^^^^^ ^^^^^- -^ thence to the river, 

reaching it above the 
Michael Bronson house 
place, a portion of the 
cellar of which can still 
be seen between the 
New England railroad 
track and the "Water- 
bury River Turnpike 
Road " (which extended 
from Salem Bridge to 
the Massachusetts line). 
This division of fence 
reached " towards the 
tipper end of Steel's 
meadow." This meadow 
lies along the west bank 
of the river from the mouth of Steel's brook up to Prindle's 
island, passing the mouth of Hancox brook and terminating 
where Edmund's mountain joins the river. Joseph Wclton's house 
indicates the locality. 

In January, 1677, this fence was ordered "to be made sufficiently 
by the last of ^lay, 1678." The entire division was in length one 
mile, two hundred and twenty rods, eight feet, and two inches. It 
was made by twenty-three men. Thomas Richardson began the 
fence at the Mad river, making only one hundred and eighty-six 
feet — his interest in the meadow lands being less than that of any 
other man. Timothy Standly then took up the work, carrying it on 
for three hundred and fifty-three feet, and was followed by Joseph 
Hickox with two hundred and twenty-three — John Newell with 
thi-ee hundred and sixty-seven— Daniel Porter with three hundred 
and thirty, leaving a Great lot interest of five hundred and fifty- 
four feet, across Great brook and up the steep Grand street hill to 
Bank street, to be made by the planters in a general way. An air 
line drawn from the northwest corner of the Grand Street cem- 
etery to the Mad River bridge is about three thousand feet, and will 
very nearly, if not accurately represent the south line of the town 
plot and the course of the common fence of 1678. 



THE COMMON FENCE. 267 

The two thousand feet of fence reaching to Bank street, having- 
been accounted for, the adjoining thousand, extending to the west- 
ern limit of the burying-yard, was made by John Warner, Edmund 
Scott, and Samuel Judd. Eight men of the proposed planters hav- 
ing not arrived, and having no substitutes at the time when this 
division of fence was necessary, compelled the twenty-three men 
who were here to combine and make the upper section in the same 
manner as they fenced for the great lots. This portion, when the 
next division northward was made, was called "a piece of town 
fence." 

The second division of fence, was the first division southward 
from the town. It began on the north bank of the Mad river, where 
it met the south end of the first division. After crossing the river 
it followed the high lands for a considerable distance, and then 
turning westward reached the Naugatuck river just below Mad 
meadow, following the hill that meets the river at that point. This 
division was three hundred and ten rods, eight feet and two inches 
in length, or nearly one mile, and was made by thirty men. The 
third division of fence, was the second division northward. It 
began towards the upper end of vSteel's meadow and continued that 
line of fence two hundred and fifty-eight rods, eight feet, and three 
inches, or more than three-fourths of a mile. This section was 
made by twenty-seven men. 

Feb. 8, 1680, an addition to the fence that ran southward was 
ordered. It began at Mad meadow and ended in the neighborhood 
of the Great hill which begins at Hopeville near the red house 
built by Joseph Nichols (about 1800), and extends to Fulling Mill 
brook at Union City. This division numbered two hundred and 
twelve rods, thirteen feet and seven inches, or more than five- 
eighths of a mile. It was made by one woman and thirty-three 
men, including "the miller." 

Thus we find that within four years an average of twenty-eight 
planters, in addition to all their other industries, constructed four 
miles, forty-two rods, one foot and seven inches of common fence, 
every foot of which had to be cleared of its primeval forest, or 
other growth, before a rod of it could be built. This surel}^ was a 
public work of no mean sort, for every detail of the fence was sub- 
ject to law, whether built of stone or wood; whether "hedged or 
ditched." 

A discovery of special interest is made at this point. It is that 
in this fourth division, the position of the fence makers in the line 
of improvement was not established by the drawing of "lots," but 
was determined by the position of the house lots in the village plot. 



268 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY 



Could this have been learned at an earlier date, it would have saved 
much hard work in determining the exact town plot of 1681. How- 
ever we are delightfully assured l3y this discovery that the house 
lots were correctly given, and that the planters whom w^e placed 
here in 1681 were here— for this fence was built in that year. We 
transcribe the list. The reader can begin at the lot of John Bron- 
son on the north side of West Main street and compare the names 
with the map of the town plot on page 160, omitting the lots of 
Samuel Scott and Richard Porter. We learn by this list that the lot 
at the corner of East and South Main streets that was "reserved," 
was a great lot in 1681. This discovery is a genuine surprise, for 
no hint of it has anywhere been given, except that in one convey- 
ance at an early date Jo/i?t Hopkins' house lot was bounded "west 
on common," but that has been held to be an error of the recorder, 
while this finding verifies it. We transcribe the list. 





« 


fc 


►:: 




« 


fc< 


c 


first John Bronsoii, 


4 


15 


6 


Edmund Scoot Sen'' 


6 


03 





second Thomas Jucld, 


6 


03 





Thomas Richardson 


3 


01 


6 


widow Warner, . 


3 


II 


7 


grate lote, . . . 


■ 9 


04 


6 


Obadiah Richards, 


4 


15 


6 


Edman Scoot, 


• 4 


05 


4 


Samuel Judd, . . 


4 


15 


6 


benjamin Judd, . 


5 


09 


2 


Joseph Hickox, . 


3 


II 


6 


John Wilton, . . 


4 


15 


6 


Samuel Hickox, . 


5 


04 





Abraham Andeus, 


4 


15 


6 


benjamin Barns . 


6 


03 




great lote, . . . 


9 


04 


6 


John newill, . 


6 


03 





John Langton, 


6 


13 




Isaac Bronson, 


5 


09 


2 


benjamin Joans, . 


6 


3 




John Standly, 


6 


03 





John Scovill, . . 


• 4 


15 


6 


Joseph Gaylor, 


4 


15 


6 


William Judd, 


. 6 


3 




grate lote, . . . 


<) 


04 


6 


John Warner, . . 


• 5 


9 


2 


Thomas Warner, 


() 


03 




David Carj^enter, 


• 4 


15 


6 


Steven Upson, 


3 


I 


6 


Tho Hankox, . . 


. 6 


3 




Abraham andeus. 


6 


03 





Tho Newill, . , 


• 5 


9 


2 


Danill Porter,* . 


10 


09 


2 


The fowr acrs fo 


r 






Timothy Standly, 


5 


14 


3 


the miler which i 


s 






John Carrington, 


3 


II 


7 


the last, . . . 


7 







The first section of fence was made during the spring of 1677, 
before the crops were planted, or a house was built. Twenty only 
of the propriet(n-s came— and with them went to work David Car- 
penter, who made John Porter's fence; Thomas Warner, who made 
his father's section, and Joseph Gaylord, who fenced for Thomas 
Gndley. The second section was made early in 1678— twenty-one 
of the former builders being present, John Root making John 



"'Danill Porter had five nxlc layd to his 3 acore lote «-hich was granted him by the towne." 



THE COMMON FENCE. 269 

Langdon's part, and Joseph Andrews appearing in place of his 
father. The third division was built early in 1679 — eighteen only of 
the builders of the first section appearing. The fourth division was 
made, in haste, in May and June of 1680. Twenty of the men who 
made the first section were present. But sixteen men held fast from 
first to last in the four divisions. The great lots were as yet 
ungiven and undivided, and appear in each division under that 
name. 

Before 1686, there was a three rod, or fifth division made. This 
consisted of the removal of forty rods of fence at the northern end 
of the line, to the east side of Hancox brook— from thence it was 
continued northward one hundred and one rods, fifteen feet and six 
inches. It would seem that no record of the three-rod division was 
made until 1700, or, about the time when it was found necessary to 
fence on the west side of the river. 

In 1691, the town caused to be placed on record the following 
formula for fence making : 

What shall be counted sufficient fence for our meadows, ist. Rail fence to be 
four feet high, not exceeding 6 inches between the rails two feet from the ground 
upward. 2d. Hedge fence, 4 feet and a half high, 5 stakes to each rod and well 
wrought. 3d. Stone fence, 3 feet and nine inches in height. 4th. Log, or pole 
fence, 4 feet in height and well wrought. 5th. Ditch, two feet wide, and rails or 
hedge 4 feet in height from the bottom of the ditch to the top of the fence, and well 
wrought. And if there be any advantage by reason of the land or place where the 
fence is, it is to be left to the judgment of the fence viewers what shall be suffi- 



cient. 



At the great town meeting in December 1698, Thomas Hikcox 
and Joseph Gaylord were appointed fence viewers. In order to pre- 
serve the fences from burning, by reason of forest fires, it early 
became the custom to clear a space on both sides of the fence by 
burning the bushes or whatever stood in the way. In March 1692, 
"the town agreed to burn about the common fence." The drums 
being beat in the morning of the appointed day, and that day not 
proving suitable, the townsmen were to appoint a day-" causing 
the drum to be beat at night, and to fire about the fence the next 
day." 

In 1700, when men began to live on the west side of the river, 
the common field was in danger from the incursions of their cattle 
—and pounds being established— men had liberty to "pound their 
neighbor's creatures in all the field north and south to the extent of 
the 20 acre division of meadow to a lot." Annual appointments 
were made of the date, when, in the fall of the year, the meadows 
should be cleared of crops and made ready for the cattle to be 
turned in. In 1699, on the 12th of September, it was voted that 



BISTORT OF WATERBURT. 
270 

"the meadows should be cleared to turn in cattle on the 29th of this 
month, at night." The next year, it was the first of October; in 
1 70 1, tiie fourth of October, and then the time began to turn back- 
ward into September again. The extremes were September 26th 
and October 4th. 

In the spring of each year, the time was announced for every 
man to have his section of the common fence put in perfect order, 
and ready for inspection. In 1704, the fence about the fields was to 
be done up by the fifth of March, and the fence viewers sent out 
the sixth, and the haywards the eighth. This year, for the first 
time, it was ordered that two days should be taken to burn about 
the fence— the first day, northward; the second day, southward, and 
" the town ordered that if the neighbors at the east end of the town 
don't keep their cattle out of the meadow, then the townsmen by 
themselves or some other on the town charge, to endeavor the 
securing the fields for the present the cheapest and best way they 
can." The two items, taken in connection, indicate that a portion 
of the fence had been burned by tr5'ing to do too much in one day, 
or possibly a freshet had had its own sweet will along the valley. 

The first pound was " set up on the South highway, somewhere 
near the south gate," in 1703. In 1704, one was "set up in the lane 
at the west end of the town — Deacon Judd to be pound-keeper." 
The same year, the proprietors "gave Judd's jNIeadow men leave to 
set up a pound for themselves on their own charge for impounding 
their own cattle and such as are left out in the field when men are 
at work with them there." 

In 1705, the town "by reason of one of its fence viewers being 
removed, ordered the other three, under oath, to view the whole 
range of fence on the cast side, and in case one of them be sick or out 
of town, the others to do the work." An intimation of a fence on 
the west side of the river at the above date is here given. The 
office of fence viewer was held by nearly every proprietor — perhaps 
by every one — that of pound-keeper, by the residents living near 
the pounds. John Scovill was pound-keeper in 1706 — and seems to 
have filled his duties so well, that in less than two months the town 
promoted him to its highest civil office — that of constable. 

As time went on, the need of a fence on the west side of the 
river became imperative. The town had tried, by all the legisla- 
tion in its power, to put off the great work. In order to accomplish 
this, it had required men who wished to live on the west side to 
enter into an agreement to keep their creatures out of the common- 
field with as much care as though it were fenced around, and 
allowed no man to cross the river unless he promised "to submit to 



THE COMMON FENCE. 



271 



the order of the proprietorvS in regard to fencing and the meadows." 
In 1704, at the great town meeting in December, the C|tiestion was 
before the meeting : " Whether the town should fence southward 
from the end fence to Beacon brook on the east side the river and 
that to be counted sufficient for securing the fields." Eighteen 
voters were present. Five of the number — John Hopkins, Left. 
Timothy Stanley, Jeremiah Peck, Dr. Porter, and Edmund Scott 
voted to extend the fence to Beacon brook. Thirteen proprietors 
voted against the extension. The land had been duly measured 
between the Long Meadow falls and Beacon Hill brook, and also 
from Buck's Meadow mountain to Long ]\Ieadow falls on the west 
side. Before the meeting ended, it was decided to build the fence 
on the west side, and to extend it on the east side "to the falls in 
the river at the lower end of the Long meadow." All the land that 
was fit for plowing or mowing was to be encircled by this fence, 
and it was to be made good and substantial against all orderly 
horses and cattle, and "sufficient against two year olds." Men 
were given permission to enclose lands within the fence "for wheat 
or other corn," and the proprietors agreed that " he who should 
leave open the common gates or bars in the field, should pay all the 
damage that was done thereby, and that horses should not be staked 
nor cattle baited (unless men were at work by them), from the first 
of April until commoning time." 

It was ultimately decided to proportion the rods of fence each 
owner of lands was to make, according to the number of his acres, 
whatever the land might be — good, bad, or indifferent. Dr. Porter 
"protested," and he had occasion to protest — for he had made more 
fence on the east side than any other man. The new public work 
did not progress satisfactorily. Certain men built the fence that 
had been allotted to them, and other men held aloof. Two years 
passed by, when a proprietors' meeting was held to discuss the 
building of this fence — and a spirited meeting it must have been, 
for the former vote was annulled, and a new allotment declared, in 
which "only the land that was fit for plowing or moing " was to be 
accounted in each man's propriety. Much land had been spoiled by 
the flood, and the owners of such land " were to be considered and 
abated." In the new allotment, each man's burden was to be meas- 
ured by the benefit received. The records recognize "the difficulty 
in reference to the fence on the west side the river," and tell us that 
the proprietors, " for to obtain a peaceable proceeding," agreed to 
the new allotment and declared that if, by reason of it, any man 
who had already fenced should be removed from that portion of the 
field, the man to whom his former lot fell should be responsible for 



_„ HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

272 

the fence already made. In the new lot, the fence was to extend no 
further than it was already laid — and to be " there or thereabout." 
The fence was to be kept up all the year, and men could turn their 
cattle into the field for the month of October only. The number of 
cattle any man was permitted to turn in, was to be according- to his 
interest in the field; neither could any man bait or stake cattle 
there except upon his own land. The owners of the east-side fence 
at the south end were allowed by the proprietors ten pence a rod, in 
"good pay" to their satisfaction, for removing the fence to the 
Falls. Every man was ordered to give the appointed committee an 
account of his land in the field, that it might be properly measured, 
and the fence apportioned. For that year, it was to be made against 
cattle, but not against hogs. At the same meeting — May 1707 — "the 
proprietors gave to Mr. John Southmayd four score acres of land on 
the south side of the rock called Mount Taylor on the top of the 
hill where we get rails as part of his propriety on the commons and 
to take off the entailment of fencing in the common line for said 
land — the town keeping liberty to fetch timber and stones — they 
shutting up bars as there shall be need." 

All the legislation the men of Waterbury were capable of — and 
they were tireless in their efforts — fell powerless for a number of 
years, before the magnitude of the undertaking. When combined 
with the sense of injustice which prevailed in regard to it, the work 
seemed hopeless. The project was attempted of "giving" away 
lands to a number of persons — the recipients to make fence, in pay- 
ment. Committee after committee was appointed to measure and 
"modelize" and proportion the lands within the fields, but the fence 
was not completed. Finally, each man who had made his fence was 
permitted to remain in position in the line, but " mistakes were to 
be regulated." In March of 1709, the condition of the fences may 
be estimated by the following vote. "It was agreed on by vote to 
burn about the fences on the west side on the 21 March and 22 day 
on the east side if it be a good day to be warned by the beat of the 
drum over night and the fence on the east side— the gaps stopped 
and gates shut forthwith— and the west side quickly after it is 
burned about." A three rail fence, four foot high, was established 
as sufficient in 1709, on the west side— but peace could not be estab- 
lished, and each man's private holdings in the field had to be meas- 
ured, "each piece by itself," the proprietors agreeing to remove 
Thomas Richason's fence from the west side to the east side of 
his land at the lower end of Hancox meadow so as to take in the 
land at Hickox Holes (present Waterville). When the lands were 
duly measured— the east-side fence came up for re-measurement, 



THE COMMOB FENCE. 2 7" 

and the grand result of the surveyors was written down in the Pro- 
prietor's Book, pictured on page 216. On its open page, as seen in 
the illustration, appears "y^' lot for y^ fenc on y« West sd y'^ River 
as it f[ell] decm^' 24th=i7o6 = to begin at y^ falls at y^ long- 
m[eadow]." 

There were fifty drawings for this lot— Mr. wSouthmayd had the 
first chance, and drew number twelve— while poor widow Jones 
drew number one, and consequently had to build the fence at its 
most difficult point— for her lot fell at the Falls, where the promon- 
tory, called Dragon's Point, comes nearly to the river. A slightly 
detached, rocky, and pine-covered little hill fills up the intervening 
space at the southeast corner, except that a narrow ravine lies 
between the promontory and the diminutive hill. At the eastern 
base of this hill the Naugatuck railroad runs, and through the 
ravine, just wide enough for the purpose, the old highway west of 
the river to Judd's Meadows, passed. At or in this ravine or 
natural passway, were located the Long Meadow bars, where in 
going from Waterbury to Judd's Meadow, one passed through the 
common-fence into the open land. 

This drawing is followed by the grand result of all the measure- 
ments of land and fence, and we learn that in 1709 there had been 
erected on the east side seventeen hundred and fifty-four rods— and 
on the west side fifteen himdred and thirty-six rods of fence. The 
measurements do not include the portion that was discontinued 
below the Long Meadow falls -and the northern terminus remains 
ungiven— the page on which it was recorded having been mutilated. 
A. little more than ten miles of fence had been constructed in 1709. 
Every rod of it was put into serviceable repair each ^^ear— while 
the continual danger attending it, by reason of forest fires, and 
unruly cattle, and floods (at the points where it crossed the val- 
leys), must have caused the planters much care and labor— but it 
was a practical and ever-present lesson to them in self-government. 
Men were not taught to live unto themselves, but to act for the 
common weal. Even protesting Dr. Porter yielded, and manfully 
made over three furlongs of fence for his twenty-six acres. Deacon 
Judd had the longest line of fence— it being only thirty-six feet 
short of a mile. He held forty-seven acres within the field, and it 
is satisfactory to find that Widow Jones made but forty-one'feet of 
fence, she owning, in 17 10, but half-an-acre in the Waterbury 
meadows— whereas her husband, at the time of his decease in 1689 
held a notable list of acres. Much of the delay and annoyance 
attending this work arose from the mistaken generosity of the 
planters in "throwing into the measure " waste lands, and "vacant 
iS 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 
274 

lands " and unproductive uplands, which the owners declined to 
fence' for— and the mistake was atoned for by giving away many 
additional acres— the sole condition being that the recipients should 
fence for the land. As quite a number of the grants were made 
after the fence reached the narrows at Mount Taylor and Buck's 
Meadow mountain— notably one requiring its owner to make fifty 
rods of fence at the north end— it is quite fair to suppose that it 
continued above that point, and there are intimations that it 
reached as far up the river as Reynolds Bridge, as mention is made 
of Standly's Jericho gate. Near the village, there were South, East, 
and West gates. The West gate was near Deacon Judd's and John 
vScovill's home lots, and they were the pound-keepers, the pound 
beino- in the highway. The South gate was on Bank street, at 
Grand— and the potmd near by has been mentioned as being in the 
highway, where the Waterbury Bank building now stands. James 
Prichard was the key keeper in 1734, he living close by. This gate 
was removed three times to a point, each time farther south, 
between 1820 and 1840, and disappeared from view when Bank 
street was opened, soon after 1840. The first removal was to give 
free entrance to David Prichard's barn, which stood where the L. 
C. White building stands — the second for the accommodation of 
Timothy Ball — who built the first house that ever stood on Bank 
street between Brooklyn and the corner of Grand street. The 
Griggs building occupies its site. The East gate was sometimes 
called the Mill Plain bars; it stood on the south side of Union, near 
Elm street. There was a North gate at the upper end of Manhan 
meadow, but at a later day this was not in the common fence. 

The West side fence crossed Sled Hall brook near where at the 
present time stands a line of primeval trees, and crossed the Mid- 
dlebury road near its junction with the Town Plot road. It 
, crossed Hikcox brook, went through Westwood and Loren Car- 
ter's land, and through the lot owned by Willard Woodruff, crossed 
the road and ran the west side of Woodruff's house, kept along 
the base of the hill west of the present Bunker Hill road, and 
skirted the hills west of the Driving park ; crossed the valley of 
Steel's brook, the southwest corner of Edmund's mountain, the 
valley of Turkey brook, and then ran " skewingwise and partly 
lengthwise " over and across Edmund's mountain to its northeast 
extremity. When the common fence was made, highways were not 
laid out, and, as the necessity for them grew imminent, we find them 
laid out through the field itself — a little later, following the fence 
lines outside the field — and then, as the inhabitants scattered and the 
uplands and mountain lots were laid out, crossing the field at more 



THE COMMON FENCE. 275 

and more frequent intervals, until common fence bars and gates 
dotted the line and the hig'hways were frequently fenced in. We 
give a single instance: , 'Liberty to James Balding' "was given to 
fence in the highway from the common fence bars at the lower end 
of long meadow to Carrington's brook, Baldwin to maintain two 
horse gates, one gate at the common fence bars, the other at the 
[place] where he fences across the highwa}'- and one pair of bars." 
In 1 7 10, the year that Jonathan Scott was captured — there was no 
record made of the closing or opening of the field. Perhaps it was 
not considered safe for cattle or men to wander in the enclosure. 
It will be remembered that about ten square miles of land eastward 
of the town was sequestered for commons, in which each and every 
man might freely take wood and stone. The annual burnings 
about the fence had probably consumed much valuable timber and 
firewood, for, in 1714, "the town voted that the East woods should 
not be fired for seven years, that is to say, the east side of the fence 
from a great brook called Smugse * brook, that runs into the river 
about two miles south from the town to the top of the East moun- 
tain to a little brook, and all the woods the west side the Mill river. 
The penalty for firing was twenty shillings. 

In 1 7 16 four fence viewers, Richard Porter, David Scott, Thomas 
Bronson and William Judd were appointed, but the following week 
"we find that Benjamin Barnes was accepted a fence viewer upon 
the proposition that Mr. Southmayd made, that is, to have 8 shil- 
lings for performing the work of a fence viewer for this year." 
This agreement is the first intimation that any one of the original 
proprietors received money for performing duties that concerned 
all alike. 

In 1721, "for securing the fence the east side of the river from 
the North meadow gate to Wigwam Swamp brook (David's brook) 
was to be by firing the east side the Little brook till they 
came to the head of it, and then to the lower end of the Wigwam 
swamp, and then down the brook to the fence." From the Mad 
river to the lower end of the fence, they were to fire the east side 
of the path to Judd's meadows. The Reverend John vSouthmayd's 
advent into the Waterbury records as town clerk is evidenced by 
his taking up the work at the appointment of fence viewers for the 
year 1721. In 1722, eight men were required to do the work — 
two were to view the fence " from the common'gate by Deacon Judd's 
to the north end " — two from the Woodbury road to the north end 
— two from the same point southward, and two "from the common 

* Smugse brook supplies the water power for Hopeville. It may have been named from an Indian. The 
name of Smugse does not appear as an English name in Waterbur5\ 



276 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



gate by Deacon Judd's to the south end." At this time, the gates 
and bars on the Country road to Woodbury, and at the South gate, 
were to be maintained by the town. Our records are replete with 
laws and regulations relating to swine. In 1723, they were per- 
mitted to run at large during the year. Liberty did not agree with 
the planters, or the swine, for the next year it was decreed that a 
" Yotik 8 inches long above the hog's neck and 6 inches on each side a 
grown hog, and proportionately on lesser swine, well put on, should 
be deemed sufficiently yoaked." Occasionally we meet permission 
like the following: "Swine may Run on the Commons without rings 
or Yokes and be free from being pounded." 

The next town meeting was to be held in January, 1724, "at 8 
o'clock in the morning at Stephen Hopkins' house," but there is 
no record of the meeting. 

In 1729, "it was voted to have a flock of sheep in the Town of 
Waterbury," and Stephen Hopkins, Joseph Smith, and Thomas 
Barnes were appointed a sheep committee. There was a colonial 
law relating to sheep, in which it was declared that no sheep should 
be kept on the commons but in flocks, to prevent the sheep either 
doing or receiving damage, except in plantations where there were 
not a hundred sheep that might be kept together. If men neglected 
to put their sheep to the herd, they were to be pounded, the pounder 
to be paid two pence per head. 

In 1739 and 1740 we find no record of fence viewers, neither is 
there any from December, 1743, to December, 1753. From that time 
onward, the appointments were made with little regularity, six men 
being able to perform the service at all times, and four oftentimes 
being deemed sufficient, while in 1770, Ezra Bronson and Ashbel 
Porter were the only fence viewers. The common fence remained 
as a bound line until after 1800, and many portions of it could be 
identified without doubt in 1893. 



CHAPTER XXII. 

waterbury manufactures for export in 1707 her men among 

the founders of durham proprietors vote to take their 

lands — current events — the meeting house enlarged 

school house built first death in naugatuck burying 

yard sequestered on pine hill remonstrance from joseph 

gaylord of durham land divisions zachariah baldwin 

arrives book of records established thomas clark 

admitted the south bound of the township surveyed 

the great sickness of 1712-i3 a new era lieut. john 

Stanley's remonstrance — more land troubles and lay-outs 

MEETING HOUSE SEATED MR. SOUTHMAYd's SALARY. 

WATERBURY began to manufacture staves for export at a 
very early date— the white and red oaks that abounded on 
every side making excellent staves and headings for casks, 
barrels and hogsheads. The extent of the manufacture of these 
staves — which were largely exported to the " Wine islands of the 
West Indies" — was such, that as early as 1714, restrictions were 
placed upon the trade on account of the rapid destruction of Con- 
necticut's forests. We are able to give but a single item in proof 
that Waterbury engaged in this manufacture — and that is afforded 
by the chance preservation of an agreement between John Bronson 
and Joseph Hikcox. In 1707, John Bronson made two thousand 
staves in Waterbury, which were sent to Joseph Hikcox, at Durham, 
who paid for them by an acre of land "«-/ Sled Hall." 

This trade was doubtless carried on vigorously for many years, 
and possibly the numerous saw -mills that sprang into being along 
our streams were utilized in preparing timber for the hands of the 
workmen who made the staves, for three saw-mills seem to have 
been recpiired before 1700; the first one on vSaw Mill Plain before 
1686, the second in 1699 at the north end of the Long hill — or at 
least permission was given for one at that point, with " the liberty 
of the stream and conveniency of ponding and the improvement of 
what land was needed to set the mill on and to lay logs and the 
like as is needed for use." The third grant was at the corn-mill in 
1699, to Serg. Bronson, Deacon Judd, John Hopkins, Samuel Hikcox, 
and John Richason — the conditions being that they should not 
prejudice the corn-mill, and that they should maintain two rods of 
the dam from the corn-mill eastward. The order forbidding to fire 



2 g HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

the East woods for^seven 5-ears may have originated in the desire 
to preserve and grow timber for pipe staves; for all the early saw- 
mills were in the East woods, on Mill river, or Great brook. 

There was an exodus in 1706 that stirred the town. One Grand 
proprietor and four Bachelor proprietors left Waterbury together. 
Of the number were Joseph Hikcox, who bought the staves; his 
brother, Stephen Hikcox; Joseph Gaylord, the Grand proprietor, 
and his sons John and Joseph. This was, it would seem, the first 
attempt of Young Waterbury to found another town; for the five 
men mentioned were original proprietors or "patentees" of Dur- 
ham, in December, of 1708. Joseph Gaylord was the first selectman, 
and Joseph Hikcox the first surveyor of that town. Thus Water- 
bury had, after thirty years, to sip of the same bitter cup that Farm- 
ington drank when bereft of thirty of her sons by Mattatuck. 

Hitherto, nearly every person who had left Waterbury had 
returned to the old home-town of Farmington, but this going forth 
was deliberate and intentional, and it was deeply felt, especially so, 
as it lessened the protective force at a time when every man was 
needed in his own place, li the inhabitants were disheartened 
there is no sign of it in their acts, for they went on laying out new 
highways; measuring their town bounds; strengthening their for- 
tifications; altering and improving their meeting-house by putting 
up^a beam for a gallery at the west end of it; consenting to Mr. 
Southmayd's request that he might alter and enlarge his seat at the 
west end of the pulpit; repairing the doors and windows of the 
meeting-house, and building a gallery at one end of it; constructing 
a school-house, sixteen feet long and fourteen feet wide; hiring a 
school-master and dame (if need be) to teach in it, and paying them 
with the remainder of a rate of two pence half-penny on the pound; 
and living the while in perpetual fear. It was during these days 
of fear that the second place of burial within the township was 
established. It is the southern portion of that now known as Pine 
Hill cemetery; the same ground so valiantly and reverently saved 
from encroachment and destruction by the efforts of Mr. William 
Ward. In the home of Daniel Warner in present Naugatuck, died, 
on April loth, 1709, his wife, Mary, the daughter of Abraham An- 
drews, Senior. We do not know that she was the first English per- 
son to die at Judd's Meadows, but her death evidently made the 
need apparent of a place of burial nearer than that of our late cem- 
etery on Grand street. The record tells us that the selectmen of 
Waterbury on the next da}^, April nth, with the presence and con- 
sent of Samuel Hikcox, laid out and sequestered half an acre of 
land of said Hikcox on the southward end of a hill at Judd's Meadow 



TO THE CLOSE OF THE PliOPBIETOES' REIGN. 279 

called the "pin[e]" hill for a burying- place for that part of said 
town or any other who should see cause to make use of it for said 
use: The record adds, that the land was laid out with the consent 
of the neighborhood, and that on the same day the wife of Daniel 
Warner was buried there. It is difificult to resist the impulse to pic- 
ture in words that first burial in Naugatuck, to gather by name the 
funeral band that went out of the house on Fulling Mill brook bear- 
ing its silent burden over the rough highway down to the lonely 
height that overlooked the river valley, there to lay it down for its 
long rest, while three motherless children look down into that grave 
the tmutterable thoughts that children think, but never speak, in 
the presence of death. 

Brief, terse and incisive are the words in which the proprietors 
of Waterbury express their mingled feelings regarding the bolt of 
the Durham men. 

The}^ disdain to even inention them by naine, but vote in January 
of 1707, "to take the forfeiture of all the lands given on condition 
to f/iosc men gone out of toivn that can not hold them by record in not 
fulfilling the conditions." Stephen Hikcox had been accepted a pro- 
prietor inhabitant in May of the year in which he left; while Joseph 
and John Gaylord, and Joseph Hikcox had been proprietor inhab- 
itants seven years. Joseph Gaylord answers back from Durham in 
1 7 13, in the following style: 

To the moderators of Waterbury. I do for my propriety — and my father being 
proprietor in said township — demand my right in said township by devision accord- 
ing to propriety, and do by this, according to Right, deny and bar an)^ grants of 
lands in said township to any, so far as the law justify me, in any other way but 
according to propriety, and as for what has been given awaj" since we came away 
and have not been warned to said proprietor's meeting, demand our right according 
to our propriety, and I desire this may be recorded. Tosfph C avtord 

Joseph Gaylord having been a Grand proprietor for thirty years 
could not legally suffer loss by removal, but with the young men it 
was different. Stephen Hikcox forfeited everything that stood in 
his name, and the others, all their grants whose conditions were 
not fulfilled. Generosity was perilous to our fathers. They 
tempted with gifts, to their own hurt. We have found evidence of 
that in the matter of the common-fence. Near the close of the cen- 
tury, at the advent into legal manhood of certain of their sons, they 
announced that to every one who would settle in the town, there 
should be given" "thirty acres of upland, swamp, and boggy meadow, 
as an allotment, with a propriety in the commons according to the 
allotment, beside a house lot and four acres for a pasture." The con- 
ditions were, the buildinof of a tenantable house, at least sixteen feet 



28o HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

square, within four years, and the inclusion m the thirty-acre grant 
of all the lands formerly given to the young men. This act was 
declared to be in force for all such as lived among them as they 
became of age and desired the privilege and were accepted by the 
proprietors. This allotment was to be deemed a forty pound owner- 
ship in all divisions of land, and a right in the commons, but carried 
with it no right to join the Grand proprietors in the giving away of 
lands. For two years the new proprietor was not to be taxed; but 
after that time his allotment was to be deemed as a two pound estate 
in bearing town charges for four years, and, after that time, to be 
appraised as other lands were. During the four years, the new pro- 
prietor might not sell any of the land of his allotment that he had 
not improved or subdued — but the record saith : " If any dye here 
his heirs to poses his lands." 

The above decision seems to have opened the door of the town- 
ship to admit any outsider who should choose to come and live in it, 
provided that the new comer gain the good will of the Grand pro- 
prietors. Joseph Lewis was the only one to enter and meet 
approval before 1700, and we have no record of his arrival or admis- 
sion into proprietorship; he simply appears on the scene invested 
with the rights of a forty-pound proprietor, and is called to duty at 
a town meeting in December, 1700, as fence viewer. He was the 
seventeenth proprietor received under the new rule. It was 
extremely natural that opposition should speedily arise under the 
new order of things. Grants of ten acres each to the Grand propri- 
etors, and four acres to the young men, flew thick and fast over the 
uplands and hills. The young men could take their thirty acres in 
three places, and the man who got first a written description of the 
land he had selected to the measurer, gained title by the act. The 
grants made at this time afford us many place-names and are full of 
interest. Thomas Warner selected his ten acres " at his three acres 
at his boggy meadow over thre mile brook;" vStephen Upson, "at his 
hog field at the north side of Philip's meadow;" Joseph Gaylord Sen. 
and Edmund Scott, "at Judd's Meadow above where Butler's house 
was;" Abraham Andrus Sen., "on the hill against George's horse 
brook" (this was Beaver Pond hill); Benjamin Barnes, "at Brake 
neck hil;" Stephen Upson, "where the grinlet runs into the great 
boggy meadow, we say that grinlet that comes from the east corner 
of the Long hill." Five or six of the young men chose their lands 
" on the hill on the west side of the river against Buck's meadow," 
where young Obadiah Richards had already broken up land. 

In 1702, it was declared that the only men who were qualified to 
act in giving away lands were the proprietors for the first purchas- 



TO THE CLOSE OF THE PEOPBJETORS' REIGN. 281 

ing- of the place, together with Stephen Upson, Richard Porter, and 
Jonathan Scott. In 1705, the question came up in Proprietors' meet- 
ing, whether they would divide the commons of the township 
according to purchase. By a full vote the cpiestion was decided in 
the negative, and the announcement was made that the proprietors 
would give away their lands to particular men as they should see 
cause, or judge that men had need of them. 

In 1707, came the sequestration of ten square miles, for commons, 
and this was followed at .the same meeting by a division of upland 
and meadow which gave every ;^ioo proprietor fifty acres, and 
every other Grand proprietor forty-five, while the new ^40 men 
received thirt}^ acres each — and lots were to be drawn for the divis- 
ion. By this distribution, more than twelve hundred acres passed 
at once out of the keeping of the original proprietors, and a disturb- 
ing force entered the little republic. Had proprietory rights been 
restricted to heirs, and every one of the Grand proprietors been the 
father of an equal number of sons to receive this largess, all might 
have been well. In the case of Joseph Gaylord, whose sons had left 
W'aterbury at this date, it was aggravating — hence, the remon- 
strance of his son Joseph, which has been given. The case of Cap- 
tain John Standly (who had returned to Farmington), was little 
better, he having but one son, Samuel, in Waterbury, and we shall 
hear from Captain vStandly in due time. The most trying case of 
all, was that of his brother Timothy, who was childless, but who 
soon found a way out of his difficulty. This division was not 
allotted or drawn for until two years later. John Hopkins and 
vSamuel '' Stanly" were chosen March 6, 1709, "to fit [prepare] a lot, 
and on Monday next 17 10 to meet at twelve o'clock, there to draw 
the lot." That first Monday in 1710, must have been a day of deep 
interest and much excitement in Waterbury. A week later it was, 
that to the young soldier, Nathaniel Richardson (who had returned 
" sick " from the war), the town voted four-score acres on the main 
branch of Hop brook, east from Break Neck hill — but the vote met 
with vigorous opposition from Jeremiah Peck, Lieut. Timothy 
Standly, and Edmund Scott — nevertheless the town went on giving 
away its lands even at the same meeting. March 5, 17 n, the second 
man from the outside world was admitted into the corporation, in 
the person of Zachariah Baldwin, of Milford, whose name appears 
as " Zacery balding J'." That inhabitant did not find Waterbury 
altogether attractive. For some reason, unknown to us, he sold in 
1713, his "land, building and other timber, and all the labor that he 
had done to it," together with his right in the township, to George 
Scott Sen., who established his son Obadiah at the place, and the town 



2 82 HISTORY OF WATER BURY. 

accepted him on Baldwin's propriety. It was at Judd's Meadows, on 
the New Haven road, near Thomas Richard's house. I think, but 
do not know, that Zachariah Baldwin was a member of the Church 
of England. 

In 1711, a "book of Records" was established, in which it was 
directed that the meadow divisions should be recorded, and Mr. 
John vSouthTuayd and Deacon Judd were chosen "to view some writ- 
ing of the Grand committee and such as of value to be recorded the 
remainder to be obliterated." It is well for this history, that in this 
instance Mr. Southmayd and Deacon Judd did not do the oblitera- 
tion-duty assigned to them. In December, 1711, Thomas Clark, a 
nephew of Mrs. Timothy Standly, was the third person admitted to 
the township from the outside world. The only record that we have 
oi proprietor s vcieetings, in 17 13, relates to Joseph Gaylord's remon- 
strance, and of 1714, we have nothing until January, when the south- 
ern bounds of the township were ordered to be measured, Mr. South- 
mayd being at the head of the committee to make the measurements. 
The Wallingford bounds were also to be looked after and settled, 
and if an agreement could not be had with that town, the matter 
" about the bounds was to be carried to court till it had a final issue." 

When we consider where the southern bound of our ancient town- 
ship lies, we are not surprised that the men of Waterbury, although 
led by Mr. Southmayd, could not satisfactorily define the line, and 
that the town called Mr. Kimberly, the County surveyor, to under- 
take the task. " In company with Mr. John Hopkins, Dr. Porter, 
and other men of the town of Waterbury on the 6th day of May, 
1 7 15," Mr. Kimberly informs us that he set forth to measure the 
southern breadth of the township. The following is the document, 
which obliging Mr. Southmayd failed to "obliterate :" 

These may certifie all whome it doth or may Concern That I Thomas Kimberly 
Surveyor of land in the County of Hartford on the 6th day of May Anno Dom. 1715. 
At the Desire & in Company with Mr. John Hopkins Dan' Porter, and othermen of 
the Town of Waterbury in Order to Survey and find the breadth from East to West 
of the Southern bounds of the Said Township of Waterbury. And I begann at 
two Chestnut trees markt, standing on the AVesterly side of a Run of Water, at 
some distance Northerly of a boggy Meadow, which trees stand at the South 
West Corner of the bounds of said Township, and at South Easterly corner of the 
bounds of Woodberry, from Thence I ran East by the needle of the Instrument. 3 
miles and 36. rods, to the River Called Naugatuck, viz— the Westerly bank thereof, 
and from thence We ran (South by the needle) one Mile & 20. rods (Crossing the 
Said River) to a brook running W. falling into the Sd River in the Southern bounds 
of the Said Township of Waterbury next Derby — from thence I proceeded on my 
fornier Course. E. one mile, then made another offsett of. 80. rods— Then again Con- 
tmued our Course. E. i miles, and. 120. rods falhng. 10. rods N. of 3 Chestnut trees 
Standing at the N. E. Corner of the bounds of :MiIford. and, X. W. corner of the 



TO THE CLOSE OF THE PBOPMlETOnS' MEIGJSf. 



283 



bounds of New Haven * * * Commonly called the. 3. brothers, alias, three 
Sisters (as these Gent'" informed me.) Then Course continued — I ran. E. one Mile, 
and fell. So rods. N. of a White Oak tree Mtykt anciently, and a large [heap] of 
stones about, and diverse Letters & figures on *d tree standing on the Southerlj- 
side of Wet land. From that tree. E. ran. 13 Changes* wanting. 16. rods to a heap 
of Stones (on the top of a bare Mountain) by us now Erected for the E bounds of 
the Said Township of Waterbury — A Map of this survey is hereunto Annext, 
Here Note that a Line drawn. E. from the first mentioned Chestnut trees till it 
Intersect a line drawn. N. from the mentioned White Oak tree in length, is, 6 
miles. &. 156. rods and that in this. 6 mile. &. 156 rods no allowance was made for 
the roughnesse and unevennesse of the Land, whereas according to my best skill 
there ought to be allowed, at least. iiS. rods. 

THO. KIM BERLY— Surveyor— 

The above figures gives us seven miles and twent}" rods as the 
lengtli of the south l30und of Waterbur}- in 17 15. The following is 
a transcription of the map of the survey. f The chestnut trees at 



J%Wi(nAA^- 



W. 






Ch^^c^ 







Dedu- T^'iM^i^ % 



^paJ^ii^Jpyi/- 









^- Q^^;^^nJc^4 Q^J^ 



the southwest line had become "two stumps" in 1753. They were 
"near Samuel Wheeler's house " which was in Derby, and southwest 
of the " two stumps." The present aspect of the " Three Brothers " 
is given on page 193. 

So thoroughly did the men of Waterbury, Derby, and Woodbury 
establish their relative bounds in 1680, that they seem not to have 
been in serious question at any subsequent time. There was a con- 



* In measuring lands the forward chain bearer puts down one of ten pins which he carries, placing one at 
the end of every chain. The rear chain bearer gathers the pins, and when the ten have been used, a furlong 
has been measured, and a change of pins is made — therefore a change meant a furlong. 

+ The last line run should be " II2 mile & 24 rods." 



284 



HISTORY OF WATEBBURY. 



test with Walling-ford in the settlement of which Waterbury seems 
to have yielded a little more than one mile and one-half of her ter- 
ritory, at the southeast corner. In 1765, Waterbury and Milford 
settled their line by this survey—" starting from the Three Sisters 
and running due west one mile and one hundred and twenty rods 
to a white oak staddle." From the oak " southward it was forty- 
eight rods to Derby's northeast corner the southwest side of Beacon 
Hill river." 







K>, 







ENTRANCE OF BEACON HILL BIO 



i i .1 I lilL NAl i,.\ I I 



, ti; AT THi; .si'KAirs 



The above survey was made in order to a settlement of the 
bound line with Wallingford. The Assembly afterward appointed 
a committee " to go upon the spot and measure the controverted 
lines," for which service the proprietors of Waterbury were ordered 
to pay Wallingford four pounds, three shillings and six pence. 
They wer6 also to resign their claim to the land lying to the 
eastward of the " Three Sisters." Waterbury borrowed the above 
money of Joseph Lewis and paid it in eighty acres of land 
in 1720. 



TO THE CLOHE OF THE PEOPRIETORS' BEIGN. 



285 



In 17 15, the limit of the attainments of Waterbury under its 
Grand proprietors was reached. We have been dimly recording", m 
faintest outline, the achievements of a few men and their sons in 
their endeavor to build an ideal English town, on foreign soil, in 
which the Law of God should be the supreme rule of man, and His 
public worship the visible sign of that rule. Waterbury was 
severely disciplined and sorely aftiicted during the thirty-eight 
years in which it remained under the government of its founders. 
In 1 7 15 it had but just emerged from the scenes of illness and death, 
that befell it from October 17 12, to September 17 13, in which time 
more than'twenty persons died. Mr. Southmayd gives us no hint of 
the origin of this " great sickness," but it perhaps was the same 
"camp distemper" that caused the troops to turn back so fre- 
quently. It began in Waterbury, in so far as we may tell, by the 
illness and death of John Richardson in October of 1712, in the 
third house (east from Willow) on the north side of West Main 
street — to be followed in seventeen days by the death of his soldier 
brother, Nathaniel, in the house next eastward; and that death in 
eleven days more, by that of Thomas Richardson, the Grand propri- 
etor, in the same house; while but a week later, from the same 
home was borne forth the weary-hearted wife and mother, Mary 
Richardson — she, who, when living in a cellar, became the mother 
of the first-born child of Mattatuck. In less than a month, on the 
1 8th of December, Israel Richardson, another son of the same fam- 
ily, was taken — to be followed in a brief while by his wife and their 
daughter. In the next house eastward, died Mary, the widow of 
the Grand proprietor, John Bronson — while in the following March 
a most unusual event took place in the Burying yard on Grand 
street — it was the burial of two young girls who died on the same 
day, and who bore the same name — Hannah Judd — the one was the 
sixteen-year old daughter of John Judd; the other the fourteen- 
year old daughter of Deacon Judd. Of the Hikcox family, five 
members died. Samuel, the first settler of Naugatuck, and his son 
Samuel, and three young sons of William Hikcox, who occupied his 
father's homestead — now crossed by Prospect street. In the next 
house, on the corner of North Main street, before the year closed 
there died the wife, and son Ebenezer, aged twenty, of Benjamin 
Barnes. Every death that occurred in the village, of which we 
have record, took place in the row of houses on the north side of 
West Main street, between Willow and North Main streets, supple- 
mented by the two houses, close by, of Samuel vStandly and Stephen 
Welton on the east side of the Green, and that of Deacon Judd at 
the west end. To these must be added the death of Daniel Warner. 



,,. HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

2o0 

at liidd's Meadows. We have no means of estimating- the number 
of those who were ill, but Dr. Porter's ability must have been tested 
to the utmost, and the need of another practitioner was felt, for we 
find the proprietors urging Dr. Ephraim Warner to ''live among 
them " and coaxing him with the use of all the school lands for 
three years, and ten acres in the sequester, and other alluring mor- 
sels of meadow, or "swamp that would make meadow." Dr. AVar- 
ner was coaxed and came, and proved professional enough, on 
occasion, to assist Dr. Porter in his "protesting" cases. 

A new era was dawning. The proprietors prepared to meet it 
by trying to place their lands on a basis that would please every- 
body^ concerned. This they sought to do by making amends for 
wrongs formerly done; by ratifying the acts of the town, it having 
illegally granted lands; and by agreeing that every Grand pro- 
prietor should have two bachelor allotments of forty pounds each, 
to each lot— a few of the "old " proprietors being owners of more 
than one Grand propriety. In the extra allotments here granted, 
all lands that had formerly been given to individuals out of the 
undivided lands were to be counted, and if the sons of planters had 
been given lands, such gifts were also to be included in making up 
the old planters' bachelor lots. This was intended to give equality 
among those men who had sons who were bachelor proprietors, and 
those who had not. Having thus restored the old planters to their 
former standing, it was next agreed to make "a division of one hun- 
dred acres apiece to each original proprietor and bachelor's accom- 
modation to each of them alike and the remainder of the undivided 
land to be divided to the original proprietors according to meadow 
allotments." To prevent any possible misunderstanding, Thomas 
Clark's bachelor-right was to be accounted on his uncle Timothy 
Standly's bachelor rights. After the above votes had been passed, it 
was formally announced that "the 40 pound propriety formerly 
granted was to be void and of none effect." 

The above votes were, without dotibt, the effect of Lieut. John 
Stanley's remonstrance, for it was at this meeting that that gentle- 
man protested vigorously and in forcible language, against the act of 
1697 — promulgated "in order to bring in inhabitants" — as contrary 
to equity and justice; declaring that the first purchasers of the land 
acquired a right in the lands according to the proportion of the pay- 
ments they made by order of the committee for the settling of the 
place, and in virtue of the articles of agreement v/hich they had 
fulfilled, and that they were entitled to the subdivisions as accorded 
by the town patent to the then proprietor inhabitants and their 
heirs. He informed them that he had nowhere seen that the 



TO THE CLOSE OF TEE PEOPRIETOBS' REIGN. 287 

ancient proprietors impowered the major part by vote to give the 
land at their pleasure, and announced that the received princijDle 
seemed to be, that the major part of the proprietors in common, 
might, by vote when opposed by the minor, give away from the 
minor when and as they pleased. He tersely told them that that 
which was consequent upon it, was, that the major part might com- 
bine and give it all to and amongst themselves, so that the minor 
part should have neither land nor commoning. Mr. John Stanley 
had been away from Waterbury for twenty years at this time, but 
his landed interests and his family ties in Waterbury had kept him 
in intercourse with its people. He was, from time to time, called 
upon to perforin some service for the town. At this v^ery meeting, he 
was " desired by the proprietors to record the Indians' deed of 
the town." 

In November of the same year, it was voted that the original 
proprietors should take up the acres of their bachelor lots in the 
sequestered land. By the next vote the}' had liberty to take them 
by their own land, and if not taken there, they were to be laid out 
with the hundred-acre division. By the next vote an entirely new 
la^'out was determined upon. It was that the allotment of one 
hundred acres apiece, to each man alike, and the bachelor rights 
belonging to the Grand proprietors, and the bachelor accommoda- 
tions, should begin on the southwest corner of the bounds next to 
Woodbury bounds, and the length of the tier of lots should be a 
mile in length east and west, and to run north on the Woodbury 
line until they had half the number of acres, and then on the east 
of said tier, a highway twenty rods wide, and then another tier of 
lots south to Derby bounds; which lots were to be a mile in length 
as the first tier was. The east and west highways were to be four 
rods wide. 

There was evidently a desire at this time, or an influence at 
work in the direction of repairing wrongs. Five-sixths of the three 
Great lots, set apart by the committee for special uses, had been 
diverted from such uses, in order to give munificently to the Rever- 
end Jeremiah Peck, and his son Jeremiah, and to the Reverend 
John Southmayd — only one half-lot remaining for the schools. At 
the same proprietors' meeting we find " a hundred and fifty pound 
propriety in the undivided land set apart to be kept for the ministry 
that is for the town to dispose on for the use of the ministry." Thus, 
we have the appearance of the fourth Great lot. The next thing 
in order was to enter in the "book of records" the names of the 
Grand proprietors. Accordingly, Dea. John Standly and Abraham 
Andrews, who were here from the beginning, and John Hopkins 



j88 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



with John Judd— whose boy-memory mig:ht serve him somewhat- 
were appointed "for finding out who were the proper original 
proprietors," and to record their names in the book of records. 

Before the year 17 15 closed the town was divided into four quar- 
ters and four measurers appointed for the four quarters. The 
northwest quarter was west of the river and north of the Woodbury 
road; the southwest, south of the Woodbury road. The northeast 
quarter was east of the river and north of the Farming-ton road; 
the southeast, east of the river and south of the Farmington road. 
To each division of the township, a measurer was appointed. 

A glance at the land records at this time will convince us that 
certain of the young proprietors made haste to part with their 
lands. On Dec. 14, 17 16, Obadiah vScott sold to Daniel Shelton of 
wStratford, eight acres in the vSequester. Three days later, Thomas 
Richards sold the same number of acres to Mr. Shelton, and the 
next month Jonathan Scott sold to him, "for a young mare, four and 
one-half acres in the Sequester, not yet laid out;" while Thomas 
Richards, "for a horse," sold land to the same party. These, and 
other immediate sales made by the young proprietors of their new 
possessions were disappointing. 

Under the progress of expected events, and the natural growth 
of the second generation, the little meeting-house was too small. 
Waterbury must have had at this time a population of over three 
hundred souls. A gallery was built, extending around three sides 
of the audience room. The "fore seats" in the gallery were 
finished; the interior of the roof was ceiled; four windows were 
"put up," and apparently everything was made ready in 17 18 for 
the arduous work of "seating the meeting-house." The repairs had 
been going on for four years under the guiding hand of Jeremiah 
Peck, the educated carpenter and school-master of 1689. One pay- 
ment was made to him in 17 18 of ;^i5. We may not readily obtain 
a mental picture of the interior from the records. Captain Judd, 
Lieutenant Hopkins, and Dr. Porter were the committee for seating 
the people when the repairs were completed. Age and estate were 
the only factors to be considered in dealing out the stations of 
honor in Waterbur}-; one year in age was counted as the equivalent 
of four pounds in estate at the first recorded seating of the meeting- 
house. It was voted that " the fore short seat in the gallery should 
be deemed equal with the pillar or second seat below; that is to say 
the second long seat from the upper end." This vote was annulled, 
and it was voted "that the short seat in the gallery should be 
equal, or next to, the short seat below." Ensign Hikcox, Joseph 
Lewis, Stephen Upson, Jr., and William Judd were to sit in this fore 



TO THE CLOSE OF THE PROPRIETORS' REIGN. 289 

short seat in the grallery and " were to take their turns yearly out of 
the four first seats." The only other item granted to us is the follow- 
ing- : " Those that were formerly seated in t/ie pe^n — the seat which 
Mr. Southmayd had enlarged in 1709 — should sit there without 
any disturbance notwithstanding our other votes to seat the meet- 
ing-house." The meeting-house having been duly enlarged, it was 
in order to enlarge Mr. Southmayd's salary. In 17 10, it was ;^5o in 
provision pay, of which not more than one-third was to be in Indian 
corn. Any man by paying money could save one-third of his rate. 
Mr. Southmayd released the town from paying him ;^io in labor, 
and it was agreed to pay the same amount in wood, at eight shil- 
lings per cord. There had been no material change in his salary 
for nine years, when, in 1719 : " It was agreed by vote with Marster 
John vSouthmayd to give him sixty pound in money and the per- 
ticullers as followeth that is to say wheet at five shillings per 
bushill ry at three and six pence pr bushill ingun at too and six 
pence pr bushill porcke at three pence pr potind flax nine pence pr 
pound and also we agree to give him ten pound in wood half a 
crown a lod for ock and three shillings a lod for warnut wood." 
This rate was to be paid before the first of the ensuing March. 

It cannot be too strongly impressed upon our minds that to this 
period in the history of the town, we find only its landed owners 
forming any visible portion of its dwellers. In every instance we 
have not been able to identify the person owning land, or giving 
name to locality. 

The student of the early history of New England towns will soon 
discover that in their building no room was prepared for non-pro- 
ducers of the necessary things of life. Every dweller within the 
town edifice was expected to do his part in every department to 
which the votes of the householders called him, and we find — taking 
at random the period of ten years from 1708 to 1718— noless than fifty- 
four men holding office, and six proprietors representing it at the 
General Court. In 1708 the town officers were a constable, three 
townsmen, a town clerk, a surveyor, four fence-viewers, two ha}^- 
wards, three listees, three rate-makers, a collector of ministers" rates, 
a collector of town rates — a school committee, consisting of two mem- 
bers, and a man " for to dig the graves." The last office was held by 
five different men in the ten years. Poor Richard Porter must have 
made many a weary journey up Grand street in the year 17 12 and 
1 7 13 (his house was at the corner of Bank street), to prepare the 
graves for the dead of that time. The new offices created in the 
interval, seem to have been those of town treasurer, chimney-viewer, 
ordinary or tavern-keeper, grand juror, inspector, and leather-sealer. 
19 



niSTORY OF WATERS URY. 
290 

During- this period the town was served by a captain, two lieuten- 
ants an ensi<ni, four sergeants and two doctors. Benjamin Barnes, 
Tr was the only proprietor who declined office. On one occasion 
when he was appointed fence-viewer, his father, in town meeting, 
promised that if his son did not do the work he would do it for him. 
If there was any one thing that the colony and the towns dis- 
liked it was making provision for the poor; it must be remembered 
that their aim was in many respects an ideal one ; that they tried to bar 
out penury and all forms of unwholesomeness. In the beginning, the 
Court of Magistrates held power over poor persons, and disposed 
them in such towns as it deemed best able to care for them. Pov- 
erty was considered a crime, consequent upon the sin of idleness. 
Men were forced to bring up their children to some useful employ- 
ment. A householder even, could not, under the town's watchful 
eye, indulge in wasting his time. The natural seats of stone on the 
Waterbury Green, it is safe to say held no loungers, and even the 
holidays were improved by the earnest workers to remove them in — 
nevertheless the poor were here, even in 1709, when — Deacon Judd 
being the town clerk — made the following record of his own act. 
"Oct. 8, 1709, William Stanard and his wife came to Waterbury, and 
Dacon Judd out of pity gave them leave to be in his house a few 
days and to work in his shop. Said Stanard staid till the thirtieth 
day of said month and then by the said Judd, as a townsman, was 
warned to depart the town and his house." A second townsman, 
Stephen Upson, also warned him to depart; but he "not going 
away" was warned again in November by Upson " to quit the town 
and be gone." The sixth of December " he was warned by the said 
Upson to depart or he would carry him away or take care it should 
be done." It is evident that the kind-hearted Deacon Judd " out of 
pity" declined to again warn, "as townsman," William Stanard 
and his wife to depart; but the law's rigors were enacted, and curi- 
ously enough we know by whom the deed was done, for when Jona- 
than Scott had been gotten out of town by the Indians, we learn 
that it was Jonathan himself who did the deed — for the town gave 
him his town rate for 1709 for getting out of town William Stanard's 
wife." There are no sweeter words in all our records than the three 
words, "out of pity," with which Deacon Judd tries to justify his 
transgression of law, in taking the homeless and the wandering into 
his house and shop— the little " smith " shop that was " set six feet 
into the highway," at the southwest corner of West Main and Willow 
streets. Did William Stanard die here, one cannot help asking, 
that only his wife was gotten out of town. The above is the first of 
a long and numerous list of "warninofs out of town," that soon 



TO THE CLOSE OF THE PROPRIETORS' REIGN. 291 

became only a form of compliance with law. This act relieved the 
town of liability to support persons (beint^ so warned) if, for any 
cause, they become dependent upon the public. In this list are 
names of men who later becaiue prominent and prosperous citizens; 
therefore if any resident of Waterbury should find that his ances- 
tor's name is mentioned in the list, it need not cause a moment's 
confusion. 

It was not until 17 15 that the colonial law was passed compelling' 
a man to support his children and grandchildren, and children to 
support their parents and grandparents. The first provision for the 
unfortunate in Waterbury was made January 6, 1718. "A rate of 
five pounds as money was granted as town stock for the necessity 
of the poor or distracted persons to be disposed of at the discretion 
of the present townsmen according to law." 

There was a colonial custom of granting a license- to certain per- 
sons who had endured unusual hardships through misfortune, acci- 
dent, or affliction, to solicit alms in certain named towns for speci- 
fied periods, but it is not known that any of Waterbury's inhabitants 
ever sought the privilege. 

Under date of April 28, 17 19, we find the following entry: 
" Thomas peate was admitted an inhabitant in the town by vote." 
This is a mysterious entry, and contains in itself, all that we are 
permitted to know concerning a man who got within the charmed 
circle, apparently without condition or obligation. 



CHAPTER XXIII. 

REMARKABLE INCREASE IN POPULATION THE TOWN DECIDES TO BUILD A 

NEW MEETING HOUSE MR. SOUTHMAYD's LITTLE MEETING HOUSE 

BOOK SEATING THE MEETING HOUSE LAYOUT OF THE VILLAGE 

THE TAX-LIST OF THE YEAR 1730 THE NEW INHABITANTS OF 173I. 

THE period from 1721 to and including the year 1731 was the 
most important decade in the early history of the town; it 
witnessed changes greater in proportion to existing condi- 
tions than any subsequent ten years has seen. The year 1720 found 
but seven of the signers of the plantation agreement of 1674 living 
in Waterbury — these were John Welton, Timothy Standly, Daniel 
Porter, Abraham Andrews, Benjamin Barnes, vStephen Upson and 
Richard Porter — the names of John Hopkins, Captain Thomas Judd, 
Edmund Scott, Jr., and John Richards complete the list of those who 
represented original proprietors. The same year found Waterbury 
with a village center of perhaps forty-five families, while twelve 
or possibly fifteen more may have been living in the neighboring 
regions of Bucks Hill, Break Neck, and Judds Meadow. There is 
no list extant of the voting population of 1720 — it must however 
have been less than sixty-five persons, — while ten years later we 
find one hundred and fifty-one men living here; an increase in ten 
years of over one hundred and twenty-five per cent. Before this 
migration to Waterbury began, the proprietors had, after many 
attempts to deal satisfactorily with each other and with their sons 
the bachelor or first degree proprietors, reached a final adjustment 
of their landed rights. There are no proprietor's records from 
March 4, 1717, to October 9, 1721. Therefore we are unable to give 
an account of the steps that led to the following adjustment — which 
took place at a meeting held at eight o'clock in the morning at the 
house of vScrg' vScovill, on February 28, 1721. Before this meeting 
was held, the report of the committee appointed to search the 
records and find out what men were entitled to land divisions was 
received, accompanied by a list of their names. At this meeting it 
was agreed that every original proprietor should have two £40 or 
bachelor lots if he owned £100 interest in the township — thus giving 
him £180 interest. A like proportion accrued to every lesser owner- 
ship. The £40 interest was considered at that date, equal to sixty- 
eight acres of land. Thereafter all divisions were to be made to the 
original proprietors according to their propriety, with the additions 



THE NEW INHABITANT:^. 293 

named. All conditions of building- and living- in the town a speci- 
fied time were removed from the bachelor lots of the old proprie- 
tors. The younger men who were bachelor proprietors were to 
receive lands according to their £40 interest, and divisions of lands 
were to be restricted to the two parties. Each man might take up 
his division "by his own land and in one place more and in a hand 
some form." The recorder, Mr. John vSouthmayd, was to issue notes 
to the proprietors for the lands. These notes, upon presentation, 
authorized the measurer to lay out lands, and the number of acres 
laid out was to be endorsed upon the note. Mr. Southmayd was to 
make a record of every note that went out from his office. Three 
of these little notes are in the writer's possession; they are about 
four inches long by three broad. One of them has the following: 
" To the Measurers in Waterbury these may Certify that there may 
be Laid out in the Common and undivided Sequestered Land in said 
Town. To David Prichard one acre and Twenty Rods on Jonathan 
Scotts Sen'' Right on the Division granted Dec"", ijt/i, 1793. 

Certified per me 

Ezra Bronson, Clerks 

On the other side is the following: " forty four Rods laid out to 
D. Pritchard June 3"' 1818. three quarters of an acre and twenty-six 
rods laid out to David Prichard* Ocf 23"' 1837-" The lay outs are 
signed by Dan^ Porter, measurer. One note calling for 201 rods 
is still unsatisfied, but forty rods having been laid out upon it. 

Deacon John Stanley was called upon to assist in making the 
lists of Grand and Bachelor proprietors. The combined lists com- 
prise the names of ninety-six men. All these, having fulfilled con- 
ditions, were owners of the lands purchased in 1674. Seventy-three 
young men, sons of twenty-four Grand proprietors had settled, for 
a time if not permanently, in Waterbiiry. Every one of the seven- 
teen family names on this list is represented in the Waterbury 
Directory of 1892. 

The meeting house was the pulse of the living people — ^hence 
the first intimation that we get of the ingress of population is in 
1721, when the town voted "to apply to the General Court to get a 
tax on all the land laid out within the town bounds, the money to 
be disposed of to the building of a meeting house." It will be 
remembered that non-residents owned lands laid out and to be laid 
out — and Waterbury proprietors exacted tribute from all, for the 
meeting house. The little old church building had but just been 
made ready, by repairs and additions, for the then inhabitants. 



* This is perhaps the only instance in vvhicli a man of over a hundred years had land laid out. 



2(j^ HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

when in 1722 the town empowered a committee to take up a part of 
the stairs into the gallery and make seats there; to stop up the east 
and west doors and make what seats the place would allow; to 
raise the pulpit, and mend the outside of the building-. 

Other preparations were made—" a rate of twelve " was laid 
"for raising up the school house (built in 1709) and other charges 
in the town, as far as it would go ; " twenty-four acres in the 
sequester were laid out and ordered to be recorded for the use of 
the ministry; six men were chosen for a committee to lay out high- 
ways and make return to the recorder — three were to go together 
and two agreeing empowered the recorder to make a record of the 
highwa}^ so returned, while a general order to the committee in 
regard to the width of the highways was, that they were not to 
exceed twenty rods, but they should be as wide as could be had 
where they did not take off any man's land, and " where men had 
fenced in the highway it was to be accounted to the highway," and 
the road through Waterbury bounds to Farmington* was to go 
where it then went, and be ten rods wide where it would allow; 
and no surveyor was to make boundaries within that stating of the 
road; the ministry land near the center (now occupied by many 
buildings) was to be leased (time not stated) to Samuel Porter and 
Thomas Upson, and the school lands in the various meadows were 
leased for six years; the school committee was bidden to demand 
the country money yearly, also the money that the school land was 
let for, — and pay the school and give an account of its receivings 
and "dispensements " at "the great town meeting," which at this 
time met every year on the second Monday in December, at 10 
o'clock in the morning; f bills against the town were first to be 
brought in, and then a rate to be laid sufficient to pay the charge. 

It must be remembered that during these years Waterbury was 
ever acting on the defensive; she was harassed by fears and con- 
fronted by actual warfare; her citizens carried on their avocations 
under terrible restraint; they went forth to their fields by com- 
mand of authority in companies, every man bearing arms. If this 
were a romance instead of veritable history, our Drum hill com- 
manding the meadows up the valley would receive its name from 
the fact that the sentinel was posted there with his drum to warn 
the planters at work in the meadows of approaching danger, and 
romance would probably coincide with fact. 



* 'i'his was the road that ran from Hartford to New Milford through Farmington, Waterbury, and 
Woodbury, hi distinction from other roads from Waterbury to Farmington. 

fin 1723, the "receivings" and the disbursements of the committee were £6.9.0, " with twenty-five 
shilhngs in tlie hands of Dr. Warner." 



THE NEW INHABITANTS. 



295 



The only inhabitant who appeared in 1721 was Gershom Fulford, 
a blacksmith, who moved over from Woodbury and entered into a 
covenant to live in the town and practice his trade seven years, and 
perform articles as the Bachelor proprietors had done. As a con- 
sideration, he was given eight acres of land by subscription and by 
vote. It does not appear that Captain Thomas Judd, the deacon 
and the blacksmith, left Waterbtiry at this time, but circumstantial 
evidence points three fingers of fact in that direction. He sold his 
house; his position as captain of the Waterbury train band was 
filled by Dr. Ephraim Warner in May of 1722, and his name disap- 
pears for a time from the list of office holders. I do not know 
whether James Brown of New Haven, or Samuel " Chidester," who 
had married a half-sister of Joseph Lewis, was the next arrival; 
both came in 1722 and settled at Judds Meadow. James Brown was 
licensed to keep an ordinary in that year. One can rejoice with the 
inhabitants of 1723 in the prospect of even one new inhabitant, and 
imagine that a tremor of satisfaction is found in the hand of Mr. 
Southmayd where he records that Dec. 10, 1723, Nathaniel Arnold 
[of Hartford] signed an agreement to live in Waterbury four years, 
for which the town gave him ten acres on David's brook, north of 
the town, near the common fence. Nathaniel Arnold's coming was 
an event of importance. The town did not oblige him to build a 
house, because there was one awaiting him. He bought the next 
year the original house lots of John Bronson, Lieut. Judd, and Daniel 
Warner, comprising six acres. The next day William Ludinton 
subscribed to an agreement to live here four years and build a 
house, and the same day the town agreed to give John Williams, a 
clothier, ten acres if he would come and sign the conditions and 
build a fulling mill and follow the clothiers' trade. John Williams' 
name is not subscribed to the agreement on the town book, and it 
is not known that he came. 

Judd's Meadow had already welcomed a substantial inhabitant 
in the person of James Brown of New Haven, with his wife, 
Elizabeth Kirby, and their eight children. As early as 17 17, he, 
with Hezekiah Rew of Milford, bought of John Hikcox a house and 
land on the hill on the east side of the river, south of the site of 
Naugatuck's first meeting house. There he had been keeping an 
ordinary, and cherishing the Church of England in his heart, 
(although he paid tithes for the meeting house), while his neigh- 
bors at the Town spot were undecided whether to repair the old 
school house, or to build a new one; whether, with the help of Derby 
to build a cart road to that place, or " a country road to be settled 
by the Court." There was, however, no indecision in regard to 



2^6 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

building: the new meeting house. Waterbnry had from her hegin- 
ning a way of deciding matters for herself. Again and again we 
have witnessed the manner in which she, quite courteously, avoided 
the aid of foreign committees, even when offered by the court. Her 
establishment of bounds with Derby and Woodbury is in evidence. 
Waterbury witnessed the discord in the towns around about her in 
relation to the location of their meeting houses, and four years 
before a step was taken in regard to the building of a new one, we 
find her people saying: " When we shall build another meeting 
house we will build it upon the Green upon which the present meet- 
ing house stands." In December of 1726, they laconically declare: 
"We will build a meeting house forty feet wide and fifty feet long." 
From the public records, and the autograph accounts kept by Mr. 
Southmayd (now in the writer's possession), the following story of 
the building of the second meeting house is gleaned: After decid- 
ing iipon the place for it in 1722, and its size in 1726, plans were laid 
for meeting its cost. It will be remembered that in the adjustment 
of proprieties, about 17 15, six new ones were created of £40 each. 
Two of these had been sold; the four remaining, were placed in the 
hands of a committee for sale, the proceeds to be expended on the 
meeting house. For money to be used in its beginning, a rate was 
laid of three pence on the pound, to be paid in May, 1727. The 
building committee was composed of five of the town's best citizens, 
Lieut. John Hopkins, Sergt. John Scovill, Isaac Bronson Sen'", Dea. 
Thomas Hikcox, and Thomas Clark. 

In the midwinter of 1726-7, the timber and other building 
materials were brought by the people to the Green, and "overdid" 
the rate of three pence on the pound, whereupon a second rate was 
laid of three pence on the pound, which v^-as also intended to cover 
the town charges for the year. 

The first cloud that shadowed the enterprise was the death of a 
member of the committee, Sergt. John Scovill, who died Feb. 26, 
1726-7, and in his place were appointed "Steven" Hopkins and 
Lieut. Wm. Hikcox. Two stakes were set down at the east end of 
the old meeting house, to " regulate the seting of the new one." The 
northwest corner was to be at the one stake and the southeast cor- 
ner at the other; the " sills were laid two feet from the ground on the 
highest ground (the Green not having been graded) and the stone 
work or underpinning was done accordingly." It was evidently far 
easier to lay rates than it was to collect them, for in December of 
1727 the first rate was still ungathered; and the second one was not 
yet in when the town announced its expectation that if the collector 
did not gather the money without delav "that the townsmen .strain 



THE NEW INHABITANTS. 



!97 



on the collector," and then, it, at the same meeting, proceeded to 
lay the third tax of three pence on the pound, which was to be 
paid in money, and was to be gathered in July of 1727. The town 
meeting- here referred to was evidently not altogether peaceful, 
for Mr, Southmayd records that "Capt. Hikcox and Stephen 
Hopkins were put out from being meeting house committee," and 
" Lieut. Hopkins was discharged from being a committee for the 
meeting house." Their successors were Capt. Thomas Judd, Isaac 
Bronson, and Deacon Thomas Hikcox. 

In March of 1728, Nathaniel Arnold and Stephen Hopkins, 
assisted by James " Balding " [Baldwin], — a young carpenter from 
Newark, New Jersey, who had recently married one of Dr. Daniel 
Porter's daughters — "culled the shingles that had been brought by 
particular persons to be laid on the meeting house," and in the 
same year the fourth tax was laid, making the entire tax eleven 
pence on the pound. By Mr. Southmayd's account book we learn 
that two hundred and one pounds were paid to twenty-one men for 
boards and work; one hundred pounds to the carpenter and for 
glass and nails. Of the first sum mentioned Mr. Merriam, the car- 
penter, was paid more than one -fourth, James Blakslee about 
forty pounds, Joseph Lathrop thirty-two, and Israel or Isaac Moss 
twenty-five. The entire cost of the building, exclusive of the gal- 
leries which were not finished, seems to have been four hundred 
and eighty-seven pounds, twelve shillings and sixpence. 

It was paid for by the sale of the four proprieties of £40 each, 
which were sold for two hundred and sixty-two pounds — of this 
amount, Mr. Southmayd tells us that Thompson's bond was fifty- 
four pounds, Judson's, the same amount, and Welles's seven pounds, 
ten shillings (on the land records, we find that Jan. 11, 1726-7, the 
three men named — all of Stratford — had measured and laid out for 
them, sixty-two acres of land " on the Northward End of the hill 
commonly called and known by the name of wShum's orchard Hill 
in the North East corner of Waterbury Bounds"); by a gift from 
Lieut. Timothy Standly of one of his Bachelor jDroprieties, which 
sold for sixty pounds; by ^' Lieut. Balding's gift," of three pounds, 
and by rates amounting to one hundred and sixty-two pounds, ten 
shillings and eleven pence. 

Whatever other debts Waterbury assumed early and late, there 
was apparently no indebtedness left on its meeting house of 1729. 
Mr. Southmayd's name does not appear on the town or proprietor's 
records as indicating his activity in the enterprise, but the little 
meeting-house book in which he kept all the accounts is eloquent 
in his praise. He recorded the following item: "To get Rum," but 



2^8 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

his pen crossed the charge— which was but four shillings and six 

pence a fact, notably to the credit of this town in that day and 

generation. 

Just one year before the meeting house was finished, Deacon 
Thomas Hikcox, the second member of the original committee, died 
and Thomas Clarke was appointed to the office of deacon. 

On the last day of June in 1729 all things were in readiness for 
that most delicate and troublesome of all ceremonial observances 
of early New England life — " seating the meeting house." As far 
as my knov/ledge enables me to state, each town established its 
own rules and grades of dignity. But two factors were recognized 
here— age and estate. In 17 19, one year was accounted as four 
pounds of estate — in 1729, as two pounds — in 1826 as ten dollars. I 
am not certain whether it was because age had decreased in value 
or the pound had increased. Every man's estate was increased by 
eighteen pounds, on which he paid, for his poll tax. He also paid on 
the same amount for members of his family or household who were 
subject to the tax. It was now decreed that only one head should 
be counted in a man's list in the seating of the meeting house. 

On the last day of June in 1729, Mr. Southmayd made the fol- 
lowing record: "At a town meeting they by vote gave me John 
Southmayd the liberty of chusing a seat in the new Meeting House 
and I made choise of the pew next the pulpit at the East end of the 
pulpit for my Family to sit in," and he adds to the record the 
words: "It was voated that we would Endeavor to seat the Meet- 
ing House." We pause an instant here, to state that during the 
erection of this building death had called away not only John 
Scovill and Dea. Timothy Hikcox of the committee, but two of the 
original planters who lived almost under its walls, Lieut. Timothy 
Stanley, and his next-door neighbor, Dr. Daniel Porter, leaving 
Abraham Andrews as the sole survivor of the signers of 1674. 

The next morning ushered in a day of supreme interest to every 
inhabitant. After deciding that all the men of sixteen years and 
over should be seated, the town made choice for a committee to do 
the work, Dea. Thomas Clark, Samuel Hikcox, and Stephen Kelcy 
(a young man from Wethersfield.) This committee was chosen 
wisely. The first member was, according to our estimate, one of 
the rich men in the town; the second represented fairly the pros- 
perous, well-to-do element, although himself a young man, while 
the third owned at that time but an ox, a horse, and five acres 
of upland. 

Over against the pew of the minister's choice, with the pulpit 
between, was the pew next in dignitv to that one. To the ever- 



THE NEW INHABITANTS. 299 

lasting credit of that committee, or the town, there was voted into 
that pew ''Goodman" Andrews* and his wife— Lieutenant Hop- 
kins and his wife, Goodman Barnes — vSergt. Upson, and the widow 
Porter. We seek in vain for increased knowledge of that day's 
proceedings, for Mr. Sonthmayd adds the words "And Doc Warner 
into the second pew," then closes the record for three months. 

If the inhabitants were seated according to estate and age, we 
might readily make a list of the order of the seating. Joseph 
Lewis had in 1729 the largest estate, closely followed by Isaac 
Bronson, Timothy Hopkins, Lieut. John and Thomas Bronson, John 
Richards, Stephen Hopkins, Richard Welton, Captain William and 
Thomas Hikcox, Nathaniel Arnold, and others. 

In a community like that of Waterbury, there was a manifest in- 
congruity in the seating qualifications, and doubtless there was an 
uproar and much confusion, which wise Mr. Southmayd concealed 
from our view as he closed the door of the records upon future in- 
quiries. We need go no further in illustration than the case of 
Deacon Thomas Judd. He had, even as others — for it was a custom, 
and with few exceptions almost universally observed — given his 
property to his children, leaving in his own name but a small frac- 
tion of a large estate, and by the above ruling. Dr. Warner, a 
younger man, was placed above him in the second pew. 

The same rules applied to the same practice in the same church 
down to the latest seating, in 1836, with few variations. In 1829 
persons w^ere seated according to list and age, ten dollars being 
allowed in the list to one year of age. But one complete record of 
a seating has been met. It is for the year 1792, and was among the 
papers of David Prichard, who died m 1838. From it, we learn that 
the meeting house of 1729 was divided into thirteen dignities, each 
dignity consisting of two pews. In the first one, at the head of the 
aisle or "alley," eight persons were seated, six men, and two women; 
in the corresponding dignity on the west side, six persons. These 
were followed by two great pews, and these, in turn, by the fourth 
dignity, consisting of "northeast and northwest pews in the square 
body." The fifth dignity was the second pew in the "alley " and its 
west side counterpart — the sixth, two corner pews — the seventh, 
the pew before the east and west doors — the eighth, north of the 
east and west doors — the ninth, the third pew joining the alley, and 
the corresponding pew on the west side — the tenth, the pews east 
and west of the front door — the eleventh, the middle pew on the 



* This is the only instance, I think, in which Mr. Southmayd used the word "Goodman," and it 
signifies simply their venerable age, and was used in the absence of any other title. Both men having 
been chosen tc represent the town at the General Court, they could not, in that day, have been men of 
inferioritv. 



^oo IIIISTORT OF WATERBURT. 

front side the house, and the west side— the twelfth, the southeast 
pew in the square body, and the southwest one — the thirteenth, 
south of the east door, and the "west side." This arrangement of 
pews in 1792 may have been very unlike the original interior of 1729. 

Tithing-men were first appointed in 1726. In the new building, 
three were required to keep all things in order. 

In December of 1729 it was voted to go on and finish the galleries 
within six months, and verily there was need of haste, for we find 
new inhabitants at more than the cai'dinal points of the compass, 
and all points led to this central edifice, on Sabbath days, Lecture 
days, fasts and thanksgivings, and on Town Meeting days. Among 
the new inhabitants we find Nathaniel Arnold, of Hartford, accom- 
panied by his mother and his five children — the youngest a lad of 
eleven; Jacob Benson, who must have had a family, for he paid a 
tax for three persons, and may have been the first settler on Wol- 
cott hill, as that was early known as Benson's hill; Henr}- Cook, 
from Branford, with his wife and five children; Samuel Brown, 
"from Boston, Hartford County," with his wife and five children; 
Joseph Nichols from Derby, with his Vs^ife and six children; John 
Sutliff, a wanderer from Deerfield, Durham, Branford and Haddam, 
with his wife, eight daughters and two sons; Abraham Utter, with 
his wife and six children; William Luddington, wath four children, 
and perhaps a wife — if he came according to agreement in 1723; 
Caleb Clark, with his wife and four daughters; Abraham Hodges, 
from New Haven, with his wife and two children; Jonathan Guern- 
sey, from Milford, with his wife and two children; Joseph Harris, 
who probably had a family, for he owned a home lot; Joseph Judd 
from West Hartford, with his wife and son Isaac; Robert Johnson, 
a shoemaker and tanner, with his wafe and one child; Thomas 
Blakeslee from New Haven, with his wife and four children ; 
Daniel How and his son; Jonathan Forbes, who paid taxes for "his 
faculty," whatever it may have been; James Johnson and his wife 
Eunice, who lived for a time on Bank street near the corner of East 
Main street, he having bought Thomas Warner's house in 1730; 
Joseph Smith with his wife and two children, he buying in 1726, 
while he was yet of Derby, the house and land now the site of St. 
Margaret's school; John Johnson, with his son Silence and his daugh- 
ter Jane; John " Allcok" with one child, from New Haven; Ephraim 
Bissell from Tolland with at least one child; Ebenezer Blakeslee, 
and his bride from North Haven (whose father provided abund- 
antly for him); Elnathan Taylor from the same place, with two 
children— while Daniel Porter, son of Richard, and a few other wan- 
derers returned to the fold. To these were added the young men 
who came to the town and found here a charm in voumr woman- 



i 



THE NEW INHABITANTS. 



301 



hood unknown to them elsewhere, for they all married daughters of 
proprietors of Waterbury; James Blakeslee, "joiner" of West 
Haven, who was taxed on £6 for "his chest;" Isaac Castle and 
Joseph Hurlburt from Woodbury; James Baldwin from Newark, 
New Jersey; Nathan and Jonathan Prindle from Newtown; the 
three brothers — Stephen, Isaac, and Ebenezer Hopkins, with their 
mother, from Hartford, Stephen paying in 1732 a tax on £'8 for "his 
cordwinding trade," and Isaac on £7 for his " turning trade " — • 
Ebenezer not marrying here; Jonathan Kelseyand ^Stephen Kelsey, 
a carpenter, who had built a house west of Break Neck in 1727 — 
they coming here from Wethersfield; Daniel and James Williams 
(brothers) from Wallingford — Daniel building a house on Pattaroon 
hill in 1 73 1, and paying a tax for his faculty, on £10; Samuel 
Thomas from "Woodbury, who bought land " southwestward of the 
lower end of Woster Swamp westward of the path that goes to 
Woster wSwamp," in 1727; James Hull from New Haven; Nathaniel 
Merrill from Hartford; John Guernsey, who married Deacon Jere- 
tniah Peck's daughter Anne, and was the first known resident of The 
Village, now called Guernsey Town; Caleb Thompson, the site and 
cellar place of whose house down the western slope of Town-Plot 
hill was marked in 1891 by lilacs and a peach tree; all these, beside 
Daniel Rose who laid out many acres on Twitch Grass brook at 
Thomaston; Daniel Blakeslee, Ebenezer Kelsey, Jesse Blakeslee, and 
Joseph "Gillet" were here before the close of 1731. 

The foregoing list of new inhabitants does not, in all proba- 
bility, include every person who came, and it may not be strictly 
accurate in every instance in relation to family. Among the 
causes of this movement to Waterbury may be found, first of all, 
the opening of the township to outsiders by its proprietors, and 
the lay out of The Village. It will be remembered that when it was 
decided to make a hundred acre division to each proprietor, to 
every man alike, the long lots were to be laid out next Woodbury, 
beginning at the southwest corner of the bounds. Owing to the 
loss of the proprietors' records between 1717 and 1722 we are not 
able to give facts, but it seems entirely probable that the vote was 
revoked, and that that division was ultimately laid out in present 
Watertown — at that part of it now known as Guernsey Town, and 
whose present name was given, because of its first settler, John 
Guernsey. The natural features of this section were such as to 
render it capable of being laid out with uniformity, in pleasing 
contrast to the ordinary manner of selecting a "piece of land" 
here and there to suit the emergency of the hour. 

As laid out, The Village was an encroachment upon Woodbury's 
east line at its northern point, for the towns adjusted the matter 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

302 

and changed the line — accordingly, the main Village lines were 
made to run with it, and the change upset the highways, but the 
proprietors fixed them up as well as they could and went on. 

The Village, as laid out, consisted of a two-rod highway next 
Woodbury, and then a half mile wide of land laid out in lots, and 
then a highway running north and south eight rods wide, and then 
another tier of lots half a mile wide— an eight-rod highway— a third 
tier of lots, and then on the east side another highway of eight rods. 
The first lot began at the south end of the west tier, following it to 
its north end, and then beginning across the highway, followed the 
second tier down, and finished at the north end of the east tier. 
An attempt was made to sell 150 acres to cover the charge of the 
lay out, should any "Chapmen" appear. The land was offered "at 
a vandue," and no other chapman appearing. Dr. Daniel Porter 
became the buyer; but for some reason he declined to perfect the 
purchase, and the proprietors received the land again. In 1722, it 
was agreed that Cap. Judd, Cap. Warner and Lieut. Hopkins should 
have the management of the lay out of The Village; they were "to 
call to the lot;" to "see what lot was drawn" and to give an order 
for it to be entered by the clerk by number as the lot fell, and each 
man's propriety was added to his name. The list is entitled, "A 
list of the Lott as It was Drawn for A Division of the Sequestered 
Land Att the North west quarter of the bounds. Nov. 28 1722 " and 
may be found on page 62, vol. i. "Town Meetings, Highways, and 
Grants." It is a complete list of the proprietors of Waterbury in 
1722; for John Stanley Junior's name is at last added to the pro- 
prietors, making one hundred and one owners. The grade of owner- 
ship varies from £270 to £40. There are three £270 lots (Mr. Peck's, 
Mr. Southmayd's — and the "School Lott"); fifteen, of £180; one, 
(belonging to Daniel Porter) of £171; two of £162; the £150 pro- 
priety created in 1715; eight of £144; one of £126; three of £108; 
four of £90; and sixty-three of £40, or an ownership amounting to 
£8,637. The number of heirs, ainong whom the various proprieties 
were divided, is unknown. To meet the charge of the laying out 
of The Village, whose lots were drawn for in 1722, it was in 1723 
decided to sell public lands, or to grant them to the creditors at 
five shillings an acre if the charges did not exceed the one hun- 
dred and fifty acres at that valuation. 

One school house, fourteen feet wide and sixteen feet long, built 
about 1709, seems to have been the only school house in Waterbury 
until after 1731. In 1730, men living at Judds Meadow, at Woster 
Swamp, and at Bucks Hill, desiring to receive their proportion of 
moneys derived from school lands, a division was made for their 
benefit. We thus learn that on Dec. 14, 1730, "Samuel Barnes, 



THE NEW INHABITANTS. 



3°: 



John Andrews, John Barnes, James Brown, Ebenezer Hikcox, James 
Johnson, Isaac Bronson, Sergt. Joseph Lewis, Joseph Lewis, Jr., 
Samuel Warner, vSen., Samuel Warner, Jr., Edmund Scott, Jr., and 
Samuel Scott," were living at Judds Meadow. At '' Woster " Swamp 
— which at that date included not only Watertown, but the " Up 
River " country of present Plymouth — were Henry Cook, Isaac 
Castle, Jonathan Kelcy, Joseph Hurlburt, Joseph Nichols, Jonathan 
Scott, Sen., Jonathan Scott, Jun., David Scott, Gershom Scott, John 
Sutliff, Samuel Tommus, Dr. John Warner, Ebenezer Warner, 
George Welton, James Williams, Abraham Utter, and Ebenezer 
Richason. At "Bucks Hill," vSergt. Richard Welton, John Warner, 
Obadiah Warner, Benjamin Warner, Richard Welton, Jr., Joseph 
Judd and William Scott," or thirty-seven families, among whom are 
found twelve names that were unknown in the old plantation of 
Mattatuck. This division of school money was the first step and 
sound indicative of the disintegration of the ancient township. 

The number of families living outside of the " town spot" and 
not in the localities named, we have not enumerated. The Isaac 
Bronson named in the Judds Meadow region was not the Break 
Neck resident of that name, but an Isaac Bronson living there in 
1730 on the west side of the river, who may have been the son of 
Isaac of Break Neck. 

The earliest itemized tax list known to be extant is of the year 
1730. That, together with some fifty lists of the period from 1730 
to the close of the centurj^, is in the writer's possession, having 
been found in 1891 in the Kingsbury house so often referred to. 
The list of 1730 is the joint product of the third John Scovill, 
James Porter, and Samuel Hickcox, the "listers " for that year. It 
is largely written by James Porter, but Mr. Southmayd's hand 
appears in it, as it does for many years in most of the public docu- 
ments of the town. 

A copy of the above list is here given. 



TAX LIST FOR THE YEAR 1730. 



John andriss one pe . 

2 oxson 3 cows 2 one y 

3 hors thee swine . 
horn lot and land 



Thomas andar one p'' 
2 hors 2 oxson 2 cows 
one yr one swine 
horn lot and land . 



iS 00 


nathael arnold 3 p . 


• 54 


00 


ig 00 


2 oxs one hors 7 cows 


32 


00 


12 00 


3 2 yr one yr 3 swine 


10 


00 


04 16 


horn lot and land . 


II 


10 






53 16 


107 


10 


iS 00 
20 00 


Nathaniel arnold Jun'' 






2 00 


one person one hors 


21 


00 


05 00 


2 swine .... 


02 


00 



45 00 



304 



BISTORT OF WATERS URY. 



i8 oo 
19 00 
04 00 
00 06 



James baldwine one p 
one ox 4 cows one hors . 
one 2 yr 2 swine 
medow land . 



John barns one prcon 
5 horses 2 oxsen 3 cows 
4 2 ye 3 one ye 3 swine 
horn lot and land . 



Samnel Barns one pr 
one ox 3 cows 2 2 yrs 
one yr one hors 3 swine 
horn lot and land . 



Thomas Barns one person 
2 oxson 3 horses 7 cows . 
I 2 yr 3 I yr 2 swin 
hom lot and land . 



Jacob Benson 3 . 
one cow one 2 yr 
4 oxen and land 



Ephrem bisel one pr . 

James blackle one pr 
one hors 2 cows 4 2 yr 
2 one yr 4 swine 
his chest . 



47 00 

Ebenezer Bronson one person . iS 00 
6 oxen 2 cows 2 two yr old . 34 00 
4 horses two i year old two 

swine . . . . . 16 00 
hom lot and . . . 05 12 



12 acor of pastm-e 
Isaac Brunson 2 per . 
4 oxen 16 6 cows 18 3 horse 
y 2 y 3 3 yr 8 swine 
one yeir old 
hom lot and land . 



41 


06 


iS 


00 


3- 


00 


14 


00 


07 


16 


71 


16 


iS 


00 


17 


00 


07 


00 


05 


10 


47 


10 


18 


00 


3S 


00 


07 


00 


II 


oS 


74 


08 


54 


00 


05 


00 


01 


12 


60 


12 


iS 


00 


18 


00 


17 


00 


06 


00 


06 


00 



lef John brunson 3 pr 
2 oxson 6 cows 6 2 yr 
6 one yr old 5 horses 
6 swine . 
hom lot and land . 



John Bronson one pr 
2 oxson 4 cows one ye 
4 swine . 
land meadow . 



moses bronson one pr 
2 oxsen 2 cows 2 swin 
2 horses . 
meadow land . 



Thomas bronson 2 per 
2 oxsen 5 cows 4 2 yr 
5 one yr 3 hors 4 swine 
hom lot and land . 



James Brown two person . 
two oxen two cows 2 hors 
three swine 
one year old . 
land .... 



Isaac Casel one person 
3 cows one hor 2 one yr 



De Thorns Clark one pr , 
4 oxen 5 hrs 4 cows 5 3 yr 
one 2 yr 3 one yr 6 swine 
hom lot and land . 



Henry Kook 2 persons 
6 oxen 4 cows 3 hors 



73 12 


one 2 yr one yr 




meedow land . 


36 00 




• 43 00 




• 35 00 


gershom fulford on p 


01 00 


one cow 3 swme 


• 17 04 


his faccnlty 



54 


00 


38 


00 


21 


00 


06 


00 


iS 


04 


137 


04 


iS 


00 


21 


00 


04 


00 


03 


12 


46 


12 


18 


00 


16 


00 


06 


00 


03 


16 


43 


16 


36 


00 


31 


00 


18 


00 


17 


10 


102 


10 


. 36 


00 


20 


00 


• 03 


00 


01 


00 


• 03 


12 


63 


12 


iS 


00 


• 14 


00 


32 


00 


. 18 


00 


. 58 


00 


11 


00 


13 


04 


100 


04 


. 36 


00 


. 45 


00 


. 03 


00 


01 


10 


85 


10 


. 18 


00 


. 06 


00 


. 18 


00 



132 04 



THE NEW INHABITANTS. 



505 



Jonathan garncey one p 
3 hors 2 oxen 2 cows 
2 3 yr 2 one yr 4 swine 
hom lot and land . 



Joseph Haries one pr 
one hors hom lot 



Ebenezer Hickcox one p 
one hors one ox 
land 



gidon Hickcox one pr 
2 oxsen one cow 2 hor; 
one swine 
hom lot and land . 



Samuel Hickcox one person 
3 hors 2 cows 2 oxsen 
one 2 yr 5 one yr 2 swine 
hom lot and land . 



Thomas Hickox one p 
4 hors 2 oxsen g cows 
6 2 yr 3 one yr 3 swine 
hom lot and land . 



Cap william Hickcox one pr 
5 horses 2 oxsen 6 cows 2 3 yr 
4 2 yr 2 one yr 2 swine . 
hom lot and land . 
for tavern keeping . 



iS 


30 


-3 


00 


12 


00 


04 


04 


57 


04 


iS 


00 


04 


GO 


22 


00 


iS 


GO 


07 


(JO 


01 


00 


26 


GO 


iS 


00 


17 


GO 


01 


GO 


5 


GO 


41 


GO 


iS 


GO 


23 


00 


09 


00 


10 


GO 


60 


GO 


iS 


GO 


47 


00 


iS 


00 


16 


GO 


99 


GO 


iS 


GO 


47 


GO 


12 


00 


12 


10 


10 


GO 



Stephen hopkins 2 persons 
5 hrs 5 oxsen 5 cows 5 2 yr 
2 one year 2 swine . 
and land 



99 10 



Ebenezer Hopkins one pr . . iS go 
2 oxsen 3 cows one hors i swine 21 gg 





39 00 


John Hopkins one pr 


iS 00 


2 hors 5 cows 2 2 yr 


25 00 


3 one yr old 4 swine 


07 00 


mill 


12 00 


hom lot and land . 


10 00 



36 


GO 


60 


00 


04 


00 


05 


g6 



105 g6 



Stephen Hopkins, Jr. one person i3 00 

two oxen i hors one cow . 14 00 

one I year old one swine . 03 go 

land 00 16 



Timothy Hopkins 2 prs . 
4 oxsen 5 cows 4 2 yrs . 
4 one yr S horses 9 swine 
land . . . • 



Joseph Holebut one pr 
2 oxsen 2 cows one 2 yr . 
one swine 2 horses 2 yr old 
meadow land . 



James Jonson one pr 
one hors hom lot 



John Jonson 2 persons 
3 horses 2 oxen one cow i yr 
3 acres of land 



Beniaman Judd one person 
one ox two cows 
two I yr old one swine . 
hom lot and land . 



John Judd one person 
two hors 3 oxen 
3 cows one yr old . 
hom lot and land . 



Joseph Judd one person . 
one hors one cow one swine 
hom lot and land . 



35 


16 


36 


00 


39 


GO 


37 


OG 


g6 


IG 


iiS 


IG 


18 


GG 


16 


OG 


09 


GG 


OG 


12 


43 


12 


iS 


GG 


g6 


OG 


24 


GO 


30 


GO 


21 


GG 




iS 


57 


iS 


iS 


GG 


IG 


GO 


G3 


GO 


03 


19 


34 


19 


iS 


00 


iS 


OG 


10 


00 


'^'5 


iS 


51 


iS 


iS 


GO 


07 


OG 


05 


14 



72 GO 



30 14 



3o6 

Samuel Judd one person 
2 hors one ox one cow- 
horn lot and land . 



niSTORT OF WATERBURY. 

iS GO Jeremeah Peck 



Cap Thomas Judd one pr 
2 cows 2 hors 2 2 yr 
one yr 
horn lot and land . 



Thomas Judd one person 
two horses 



William Judd 2 per. . 
two oxsen 5 cows 2 2 yr 
3 one yr 5 horses 4 swine 
hom lot and land . 



13 00 

2 15 

33 15 

iS 00 
16 00 
01 00 
04 00 

39 00 

18 00 
06 00 

24 00 

36 00 

27 < X ) 
22 00 
10 16 

95 i(' 



Jonathan Chelcy (Kelsey) one pr. iS 00 

one ox one hors two cows . 13 00 

land i*^ 



Stephen Celey (Kelsey) one per. 
one ox one hors 
upland 5 acres 



Joseph Lewis sn' 2 prs 
5 oxen S cows 6 horse 
4 2 yr 2 one yr S swine 
hom lot and land 



Joseph lewis Jun' one p 
one hors 2 cows 3 2 yr 
2 swine and land 



losei)h Nickkols two person;- 
4 oxen 3 cows two hors . 
one two year old 2 swine 



31 


16 


18 


00 


07 


00 


02 


00 


-1 


00 


3(> 


00 


62 


00 


iS 


00 


16 


10 


132 


10 


18 


(K) 


15 


00 


"5 


10 


3S 


10 


36 


00 


31 


<JO 


04 


(j(j 



one person 4 cows . 
two oxen ten two yr 
4 hors one yr on swine 
hom lot and land . 



Daniel Porter one person 
one hors three cows 
one two year old 
land 



Wid [Deborah] Porter one hors 
one ox 2 cows one ye 
3 swine ..... 
hom lot and land . 



Elnizer Porter one person 
one hors . 



James Porter one person 
two hors two oxen . 
Land 



Thomas porter one person 
3 oxen 12 2 cows 6 
I two year and 2 yearlings 
3 swine 3 3 Acres Hom lot 3 
Land meadow and upland 



Jonathan prindel one p 
2 oxen one hors 2 2 yr 
7 acres upland 



Nathan Prindel one person 
one hors one cowe i ye . 



John Richards 3 prs . 
6 oxen 5 cows 4 hors 
2 one yr 5 swine 
15 acres meadow land 



30 


00 


28 


00 


14 


00 


12 


00 


S4 


00 


18 


00 


12 


00 


02 


00 


02 


00 


34 


00 


"3 


00 


II 


00 


03 


00 


06 


00 


23 


00 


iS 


00 


03 




21 


00 


18 


00 


14 


00 


04 


00 


36 


00 


18 


00 


18 


00 


04 


00 


06 


00 


3 


16 



49 16 

iS 00 
15 00 
02 16 

35 16 



18 


00 


07 


00 


25 


00 


54 


00 


51 


00 


07 


00 


05 


00 



THE NEW INHABITANTS. 



307 



Thomas Richards one pr 
3 hors 3 oxson 5 cows 
2 one yr 5 swine 
horn lot and land . 



Ebenezer Richson two persons 
4 horses two oxen . 
3 cows two 2 year old 
one I yr old two swine 
home lot and . 



Daniel rose one per 
one hors one cow 



david Scoott one pr. . 
3 hors one ox one cow 
one 2 yr 3 swine 
hom lot and land . 



Edmon Scott Snr 2 pr 
3 hors 4 oxsen 3 cows 2 2 yr 
3 one yr 4 swine 
hom lot and land . 



IS 


00 


36 


00 


07 


00 


06 


02 


57 


02 


36 


00 


20 


00 


13 


00 


03 


00 


05 


12 



77 12 

iS 00 
06 00 

24 (JO 



iS 


00 


16 


00 


05 


00 


07 


00 



46 00 



3f' 


00 


3S 


00 


"7 


00 


10 


14 



91 14 



Edmon Scott Jnr one pr . 


iS 


00 


2 hors one ox one 2 yr . 


12 


00 


land .... 


02 


18 




3- 


IS 


Edmon Scoott min' one p 


iS 


00 


2 oxsen 2 cows one hors 


17 


00 


hom lot and land . 


4 


00 



39 00 
geshom scott one person iS two 

oxen S . . . . . 26 00 
two cows 6 one Horse 3 . 09 00 
one swine 20 sh 3 Acres Hom 

Lott . . . . . 04 00 
4 Acres plowland . . . 01 12 
4 Acres meadow 2 Acres pasture 01 oS 

42 0(J 



Jonathan Sot Sen'' 2 persons 
three oxen 3 Cows . 
2 three years old one 2 year 
one I year one swine 4 hors 
land .... 



3b 


00 


21 


00 


oS 


00 


14 


00 


10 


14 



90 14 



Jonathan Scoot Jun'' one person iS 00 
two oxen one Cow 3 hors . 20 00 
land 05 10 



43 10 



45 


12 


iS 


00 


26 


00 


03 


00 


oS 


02 



55 02 



obadiah scott one person one ox 22 00 
three cows three horses . . iS 00 
one year old . . . . 01 00 
three acres Hom Lott 4 acres 

upland . . . . u4 12 



vSamuel Scott Sn'' i per. 
2 oxen 3 hors 3 cows 
one 2 yr one yr 
hom lot and land . 



Samuel Scot Jun one p. 
2 oxsen 2 cows 2 horses . 
one swine 
hom lot and land 



Widow Sarah Scott (David) 2 ji. 
one ox 3 cows one hors . 
one 2 yr one yr 2 swine . 
hom lot and land 



William Scoott one per 
one ox one hors one cow 
one swine hom l(_)t tK: land 



John Scovel 2 persons 
2 hors 2 oxsen 3 cows 
2 2 yr 3 one yr 2 swine 
hom lot and land . 



iS 


00 


20 


00 


01 


00 


07 


00 



46 00 



36 


00 


16 


00 


05 


00 


II 


00 


68 


00 


iS 


00 


10 


00 


"3 


0(J 


31 


00 


36 


00 


23 


00 


09 


00 


06 


iS 



74 IS 



jo8 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



William Scovel one person 
2 horss 3 ox son 4 cows . 
2 2 yr one yr 3 swine 
horn lot and land . 



Joseph Smith one person . 

4 horses 4 swine hom lot and 
land iS 06 



iS 


00 


30 


00 


oS 


00 


07 


00 


63 


00 


iS 


GO 



John Sutliff 2 pr 

3 hors 2 cows 3 2 yr one yr . 
meedow land . . . . 


36 06 
36 00 

22 GO 

01 16 


Samuel Thomes one person 
two oxen one cow one hors . 


59 16 

iS GO 
14 00 



Caleb Thomes (Thompson) one per- 



iS 00 



John Ubson one per . 

one hors one ox 4 as cows 
one yr old 3 swine . 
hom lot and land . 



iS 


00 


■ 19 


00 


. 04 


00 


03 


12 



44 i: 



Stephen Upson Sen one hors one 
ox 2 cows 
one I year hom lot and land 



Stphen upson Jun one per 
3 hors 4 oxson 5 cows 2 on yr 
hom lot and land 



Thomes Upson one person 

two horses two oxen one swine 15 go 
three cows one 2 ye i one year 

old 12 GO 

hom lot and land . . . 06 oo 



13 


00 


5 


G2 


iS 


G2 


18 


00 


42 


00 


07 


00 


67 


GO 


18 


00 



51 oo 



Abraham auter (Utter) one i:)erson 18 oo 

2 cows 2 one yr . . . 10 00 

3 horses 3 one yr . . . 12 00 
5 swine hom lot and land . 08 00 

48 GO 



abraham warner one p 
one hors one 3 ye one 2 ye 
one half a hors 



Beniamen Worner one person 
two oxen two cows 3 hors 

iive Swine 

hom lot and land . 



iS 


GO 


s 


00 


01 


10 


27 


10 


iS 


00 


23 


00 


05 


00 


05 


GO 



51 GO 



Ebenezeer Warner Sen one per- 
son iS 00 

one hors one cow three swin . 09 00 



Ebnezeer Warner jr Son of Daniel 
one person 
three horse and half 
one cow & two yr old 



"do ephrem warner one pr 
one cow 2 hors 5 2 yr 
one swine 
hom lot and land . 



18 


00 


10 


lo 


05 


GO 


33 


IG 


iS 


00 


19 


00 


01 


00 


3 


g6 



41 06 



36 


12 


36 


00 


iS 


00 


10 


OO 


02 


16 



Doc John Worner one person . 18 go 
two hors one ox 2 j-r old 2 swine 14 go 
hom lot and land . . . 04 12 



John Warner Jun two person 
two oxen two cows 4 swine 
two hors two 2 3-e . 
hom lot and land . 



Obadiah Warner one person 
two oxen 2 cows one hors 
swine . . . . . 
hom lot and land . 



Samuel Worner Sr. Land 
one hors 2 cows i two yr 



66 16 



1 8 00 



20 


00 


03 


00 


41 


00 


01 


00 


II 


00 



THE NEW INHABITANTS. 



309 



Samuel warner Jun one p . iS 00 

2 hors one ox 2 cows . . 16 00 

one 2 yr 4 swine . . . 06 00 

hom lot 01 10 



Richard Welton Sen 3 person . 54 00 

two oxen 7 hors 3 cows . . 38 00 

4 two yr old 2 one year 5 swine 1 5 00 

hom lot and Land . . . 19 00 





41 


10 


gorg welton 2 per 


• 36 


00 


2 oxson 2 cows 3 hors 2 : 


2 yr 




21 yr . 


• 29 


00 


5 swine meadow land 


05 


iS 




70 


iS 


John Welton one person . 


. iS 


00 


t\\-o oxen two cows 


14 


00 


one year old one Horse . 


. 04 


00 


Hom Lott Meadow Land 


04 


00 



40 00 
The sum total of this list is ^5024 15s. 

[In May of 1731, was added to this list 
the Slim of ^^214.] 



richard welton jun one per 
2 hors 2 oxson 3 cows 
one yr 2 swine 
hom lot and land . 



Daniel Williams one person 
one hors .... 



James Williams 

2 hors one cow land 



126 00 

iS 00 

23 00 

03 00 

03 16 

47 16 

18 00 

03 00 



09 16 



John Scovill, 
James Porter, 
Samuel Hickcox, 



Listers. 



It contains the names of one hundred taxpayers who paid taxes 
for one hundred and twenty-five persons, while one hundred men 
held dominion over two hundred and twenty-seven horses, two 
hundred and forty-two cows, two hundred and fifty-nine young 
cattle, one hundred and sixty -six oxen, and one hundred and 
ninety-three swine — a very respectable exhibit for Waterbury in 
1 73 1 — that town ranking as ntimber forty-one of the forty-four 
towns of the colony in the amount of its tax-list — but three, Derby, 
New Milford, and Ashford, sending up to the General Assembly 
tax lists of less amounts. 

Dwelling houses were not taxed, and it is not easy to estimate 
the number of them at this period. The custom existed of building 
houses on land not owned by the builder. We meet with instances 
of that practice continually during the early part of the eight- 
eenth century, and there is at least one mill and mill trench that 
was built before the land was made secure by deed. The pro- 
prietors forbade no man to build his house on the sequestered 
lands — accordingly, there has been found, even in the present cen- 
tury what may perhaps be called a surviv^al of the ancient order of 
things ; in any event it is noticeable that to the northward, on 
Burnt Hill, and in the East Woods a notable number of humble 
habitations have been constructed, whose owners have held no 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

title to the lands on which they lived, but whose presence has iDcen 
tolerated by the land's owner, out of kindliness of heart. 

In 1731, twenty-three new names appear on the tax-list, but this 
is not conclusive evidence that the men indicated were not " of 
Waterbury " at an earlier date. Upon it are the names of Daniel, 
Ebenezer, and " Jese " Blakeslee or " Blakslee," John Allcock, Caleb 
Clark, Jonathan Forbes, who was taxed for a faculty; John Guern- 
sev, Abraham " Hoges,". Isaac Hopkins, Daniel How, James Hull, 
Robert Johnson, Ebenezer Kelsey, Nathaniel Merrill, Elnathan 
Taj'lor, Samuel Towner, and others of Waterbury; while Samuel 
Brown becomes in this year, Deacon Samuel Brown. These were, 
with few if any exceptions, young" men and most of them married 
in Waterbury. 

At the great town meeting in December of 1731 "it was voted to 
build a school house of twenty foot square on the Meeting House 
Green;" and to "give the Rev'' Mr. John Southmayd for his vSallery 
one Hundred pound " in money or provision pay at the market 
price — giving any man permission to make such agreement for his 
rate as would please Mr. Southmayd and himself. On Dec. 20, 1731, 
Mr. Southmayd " acquitted and discharged " the town from all rates 
for his labor among the people from the year 1699, to the year 1723. 
His pastoral relation to the people began in the former year, and 
his duties as town clerk a little earlier than the latter year, and no 
satisfactory explanation of the occasion for the above acquittance 
has been found. The "twentj-feet-square " school house may seem 
small, painfully small, for the children of Waterbur}- in 1731, but 
it must be remembered that it was not encumbered with desks or 
other modern appliances, and that it was occupied by the children 
living at the town center alone, while the meeting house, whose 
area was five times that of the school house was for the accommo- 
dation of the entire township. 



CHAPTER XXIV. 

THE NORTHWEST INHABITANTS PETITION FOR "WINTER PRIVILEGES" 

WOOSTER UP RIVER HENRY COOK, THE FIRST INHABITANT OF 

PLYMOUTH HIS GRANDSON, THE LAST SURVIVOR OF THE WAR 

OF THE REVOLUTION THE ATTITUDE OF THE TOWN TOWARD 

THE PEOPLE AT WOOSTER SWAMP TOWARD THE PEOPLE AT 

TWITCH GRASS MEADOW. 

IN May of 1732 the vSecond company or train band of Waterbury 
was formed, with Mr. Timothy Hopkins confirmed as its cap- 
tain, Mr. Thomas Bronson as its lieutenant, and Mr. vStephen 
Upson as its ensign. In May of 1728 Waterbury had, at her own 
intercession (because of the distance), been transferred from the 
Count}' of Hartford to that of New Haven, and for twelve 3'ears 
the estates of persons deceased had been settled at the Probate 
Court in Woodbury. In 1732 twenty new names had been added to 
the list of inhabitants; Mr. Southmayd's salary had been raised to 
^100 money; the tax had been laid for finishing the galleries of the 
new meeting house; a new school house had been ordered and the 
timber for it gathered, and all things were moving along with 
seeming prosperity, when, in the autumn of the year, a darkness 
deep and portentous fell. 

For the first time in all its history it is recorded that the town 
meeting was opened by prayer, and verily prayer was become more 
than ever a vital need, for thirty-two inhabitants to the northward 
of the Town Spot had sent a petition * to the General Assembly 
in which they told a thrilling story of the perils that attended 
the journey from their homes to the meeting house in wintry 
weather — not from savage foe, not from beast of the forest — but 
by reason of that " great river " which they called " Waterbury 
river." The}^ declared that the way was " exceeding bad " and 
that the river was not passable during a great part of the winter 
and spring, and, in a subsequent petition, it was declared that the 
highway from present Plymouth and Thomaston to the meeting 
house crossed the river nine times, and the petitioners besought 
the Court that they might have liberty to hire a minister to preach 
the gospel to them during the months of December, January, Feb- 
ruary and March, and that their dues to Mr. Southmayd might 



■ This petition may be found in Dr. P.ronson's History of Waterbury, p 2 = 4 



^j2 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

cease during those months. Eleven men, living within the de- 
scribed bounds, did not sign the petition. The answer was accord- 
ing to their wishes — for thirty -two men petitioned, and thirty 
families had long been deemed a sufficient number to support a 
minister. The liberty was granted for four years— from 1732 to 
1 736. The petition to the Court states that the town had refused 
the request for the above privilege, but our town records give 
no evidence that the request was ever made to the town. The 
only recognition of it was a special town meeting appointing the 
deputies for the town " to answer a memorial brought to the court 
by our northwest inhabitants." 

It is impossible for us to realize what this blow was to the Town 
Spot. The men of 1732 knew perfectly well what lay before them— 
the little children of the distant villages could not be sent to the 
town school at the centre every day, and they had freely consented 
to a division of the school moneys — but, the minister's rates! Mr. 
Southmayd's dues ! How were they to be met ? How we wish we 
could hear the words of the prayer at that town meeting in Decem- 
ber, 1732 1 Already there loomed up in vision ecclesiastical socie- 
ties to the north, south, east and west. All that was needed to gain 
the victory over the old town by her children up the river or down, 
was thirty families in any one direction who could support a min- 
ister. It became almost a matter of self-preservation, to prevent 
the repetition of a like catastrophe elsewhere. 

The town meeting was a serious affair, and often a severe test of 
the manliness of its attendants. Certain laws for the guidance of town 
officers in the suppression of crime and all manner of evil doing- 
were ordered to be read in ever}^ town at the annual meeting in De- 
cember. Men were not permitted to speak, except to ask permission 
of the moderator to address the meeting, and no business not ex- 
pressly stated in the warning could be brought before it for action. 
It will be remembered that Deacon Judd's dial post was to be the sign 
post in 1709, and in the same year a notice on the meeting house 
door was to be sufficient warning for men living at a distance — 
but later all notices were to be torn down from the meeting house 
door on the Lord's day, unless such notices related to marriage. 
The deep feeling of the people was expressed in the fact that but' 
one man who had signed that petition was elected to office for the 
year 1733. 

The earliest name applied to the region now occupied by Ply 
mouth and Thomaston was Up River, so nained in 1688, because that 
here lay the up river division of meadow lands. Twitch Grass 
meadow was, for some reason, selected at a later day as a name for 
the same region, to distinguish the little hamlet there from their 



EARLY NORTHBUIIY. 313 

distant neighbors at " Woster " or " Woster vSwamp." Taken collect- 
ively present Oakville, Watertown and Plymouth were in 1730 some- 
times called Woster, and sometimes "Our Northwest Inhabitants." 

Thirty acres of the elevated ground or plain on which the vil- 
lage of Thomaston stands was the up river division of five men, 
each one of whom bore the name of John — John Stanley, John 
Warner, John Newell, John Scovill, and John Carrington. Samuel 
Stanley, a son of the above John, also had twelve acres laid out on 
the above plain. Twitch Grass meadow is the extensive meadow 
west of the river just below the village. The natural expanse 
of meadow just above Thomaston bridge is Abraham Andrew's 
meadow of 1688; a portion of it was Philip Judd's, but it was long 
known as Andrew's meadow. Just above Andrew's meadow, and 
near the central street to the bridc.'e is a rocky ridge on which 
there is a " picnic grove." This ridge divides Andrew's meadow 
from W^elton's up-river division. It was in Welton's meadow that 
the supposed first house in Plymouth was built. 

Henry Cook is accredited as the first settler of Plymouth, Conn. 
He was the grandson of Henry Cook and Judith Birdsale who 
were married at Salcm, Mass., in June of 1639, and he was the son of 
their eighth child, Henry, who was born in 1652. He was born at 
Wallingford in 1683, and is said to have lived at Branford, from 
whence he removed to Litchfield before 1727. We risk little in 
suggesting that he may have been one of the seven men of Bran- 
ford who were sent up from the Coast, under the command of a 
sergeant, for the protection of Litchfield in 1725, and that the new 
town proved so attractive to him that he removed thither. Pos- 
sibly Daniel Rose, from the same place, was also one of the seven, 
for we find Henry Cook of Litchfield and Daniel Rose of Branford, 
buying land as partners in Waterbury less than two years after the 
twenty-one men from Branford, Guilford and Wallingford marched 
(probably through Waterbury), on their way to the new town in 
the wilderness. That march doubtless inured to the benefit of 
both towns in more ways than were then dreamed of. 

In Welton's meadow on Feb. 2, 1727-8 Henry Cook of Litchfield 
and Daniel Rose of Branford bought of Gershom and Abigail 
Fulford, Thomas and Mary Porter— heirs of Stephen Welton — two 
thirds of a lot of land " supposed to be ten acres more or fewer 
lying towards the upper end of the bounds that was our grand- 
fathers, John Welton's deceased." Feb. i, 1727-8, or the day before, 
Cook and Rose had bought of Thomas and Mary Porter twenty 
acres to be taken up in the undivided lands, and the next day they 
had it laid out on the west side of Welton's meadow. Jan. 14, 1728, 
nineteen and a half acres were laid out to the same parties " at 



HISTOR Y OF WA 1 ERB UR Y. 
o '4 

a place called Welton's meadow," and the same day still another 
''triano-le" piece of thirteen acres, both pieces having been bought 
of Jonathan Scott, Jim. April lo, 1730, Henry Cook had laid out, "a 
little southwest of Twich Grass brook," on John Stanley, Junior's, 
bachelor lot (which poor John had so much difficulty in securing) a 
diamond shaped piece of land that contained one hundred acres, — 
this he sold the same year to Jeremiah Hull. Before Jan. 10, 1731, 
Cook had built a house in Welton's meadow, for he sold at that 
date to Elnathan Beach of New Cheshire forty acres from the 
south end of his farm on the west side the river, joining to the 
river, and in 1733 he owned a house lot of seventy acres with the 
river running through it, about fourteen acres of which were east 
of the river. This farm, with a house and other buildings, fruit 
trees, and fences — all upon the west-side portion of it — he sold in 
1733 to Ebenezer Elwell of Branford, and Gideon Allyn of Guilford. 
In 1730 he gave John Standly, Jr. of Kensington ^70 in bills of 
public credit for his ^40 interest in the township. He laid out one 
hundred acres, with Rose, at the West Branch, in 1730; over a hun- 
dred with Mr. Thomas Brooks, merchant, of Boston, at Poland 
(then, in Waterbury) in 1731; while numerous other purchases and 
layouts filled the time until 1735, when Mr. Southmayd conveyed 
to him fifty-three acres. After the sale of his first house to Eben- 
ezer Elwell, he built another house, or at least he sold land in 1737 
to John Humaston of New Haven, described as " sixty-nine acres 
with a house upon it, with the buildings, fencing, fruit trees, timber, 
stones, watering and appurtenances." This deed, his wife, Sarah, 
(who must have been his third wife) signed with him. The land 
was "by Litchfield line " — bounded north " on land left for a high- 
way b}^ Litchfield bounds." In 1739, he had a house at Poland, with 
"a brook running on the cast side of it." In 1748 Henry Cook and 
his son Henry Cook quit-claimed to Samuel and P2noch- Curtice 
"lands at Poland, originally called Lewis and Judd lots, excepting 
one hundred and twenty-five acres." Upon this one hundred and 
twenty-five acres that he reserved his house stood. We have found 
Henry Cook, <?/ Litchfield in 1727 — <;/ Waterbury in 1729, at which 
time he went to Branford and sold to Josiah Rogers of that town 
twelve acres of land in Waterbury; and the next year we find 
him selling to Joseph Chittenden of Wallingford fifty-three acres 
(Chittenden calling him, "my father, Henry Cook);" to Dr. Jeremiah 
Hull of Wallingford one hundred acres; to Samuel Towner (Cook 
calling him "brother Towner") land " seven score rods north from 
his house," and to Elnathan Beach, of New Cheshire, forty acres 
off the south end of his farm— and all, before the close of 1731. 
The first settler of any town holds, as such, an unic[ue position, 



EA EL Y NOR TUB UR Y. 



115 



and we have given space to information that may serve to identify 
the site of Henry Cook's first, and subsequent habitations. We 
have found him to be a man of coiirage, enterprise, and a spirit 
that withstood injustice. While he was, apparently, one of the 
foremost promoters of the established church, he seems to have 
been so incensed one year at having" his j^roperty four-folded, or 
put into the list at four times its value — when perhaps the river 
was so high that he could not get to the Town Spot with his tax- 
list — that the next year he went over to the Church of lingland. 

While we are not able to present to view the face of Henry 
Cook, the soldier of the wilderness, we are able to give as his repre- 
sentative that of his soldier grandson, Lemuel Cook. He was, it is 
believed, the last survivor of the men who made possible the United 
States of North America. He was born in Waterbury (Northbury 
Society), it is believed in 1764, and was the second Lemuel born to 
Henry Cook and Hannah Benham — the first Lemuel having died in 
1760. The Court of Probate at Woodbury, named a Lemuel among 
the living children of Henry Cook, deceased, in 1772. The History 
of Kirkland, New York, states 
that he died May 21, 1869, aged 
one hundred and four years — 
but a letter from his youngest 
grandchild, Louis P. Cook, of 
Clarendon, N. Y., informs us 
that he died May 20th, 1866. 

Early in 1730 Ebenezer 
Blakeslee of New Haven be- 
came the owner of sixty acres, 
in two pieces, lying " in att 
and about the place common- 
ly called and known by the 
name of twich Grass Mea- 
dow ; " Joseph Hurlburt, of 
seventeen acres, in two 
pieces, one of them on a plain 
north of the meadow ; and 
Joseph Chittenden built a 
house that he sold to Bar- 
nabas Ford. It was a small 
house, and it or its successor 
became the center of the socieiy that was later formed. As will 
be seen, the name of the region from 1730 to 1732 was " Twich " Grass 
Meadow. Before the close of the year 1732, so great was the activity 
of Llenrv Cook and his friends that when it became nccessarv to 









'■■jS^ '*. 






'•»r' 






J\ ■'. 


i- 




N.^ 


j|,A 




%^ 


1^ 


111. 


^' 




X 




LEMIKL COOK 

AT THE Ai,E OK ONE HINDRED YEARS ; 

THE LAST SURVIVOR OF THE WAR OK THE REVOLUTION". 



5 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

group tog-ether, for taxation, the fifty-two men who represented 
the inhabitants living at Woster (Watertown), Pine Meadow (Rey- 
nolds Bridge), and Twitch Grass Meadow (Thomaston), or all that 
region lying between Oakville and the north bound of the town- 
shTp— Samuel Hikcox and David Scott, the listers, inscribed on the 
title page of the small tax-book the following: "The List of North 
Burey in Waterbury," ignoring Wooster Swamp completely, and 
giving to Twitch Grass Meadow and all the region thereabout the 
name^ of Northbury seven years before it was conferred upon the 
ecclesiastical society incorporated by legal authority. 

The near presence of the hill, from whence the men of Farming- 
ton took specimens of ore in 1657, may have been an inciting cause 
in gathering inhabitants, and could the inner history of the period 
from 1730 to 1735 be revealed, we should doubtless find that for- 
tunes were dreamed of in the upper valley of the Great river by 
more men than poor John Sutliff (the grandson or great-grandson 
of the settler), who lived, and toiled, and died, in later years, in the 
full belief that the earth of Northbury stood ready to give forth 
treasures in metals to the faithful seeker. It is said that he made 
reservations relating to mines and minerals in all deeds that he 
gave, and the place is still pointed out where he, single handed, 
carried on his mining operations. It will be remembered that the 
staid planters living at the Town Spot (including Deacon Judd) 
owned, against English Grass meadow, "a place called the mines", 
in 1735. Who can tell how many " specimens " Henry Cook carried 
with him when he went forth to induce Elnathan Beach, Dr. Jere- 
miah Hull, Josiah Rogers, Joseph Chittenden, Samuel and Phineas 
Towner, Samuel and Enoch Curtiss, and vSamuel Cook, merchant, to 
become purchasers of Northbury lands, or what inducements he 
held forth to Mr. Thomas Brooks of Boston, to invest with him in 
lands at Poland ! Seven years later we find Mr. Brooks buying 
half an acre " on the plain a little north of the turn of Poland 
river, north of his own and Cook's land." In this connection it 
should be mentioned that the name of a branch of the Naugatuck 
river was changed at about the time of the settlement of North- 
bury— from the East Branch to Lead Mine brook ; also, that the 
brook enters the river at a point quite near the place opposite 
English Grass meadow, where marks still remain which may be 
attributed to attempts at mining in view of the recorded evidence 
of such an attempt having been there made. Not far below this 
lead mine section begins the tract of country once known as Henry 
Cook's (first) farm whose southerly end lay in Welton's meadow, 
which in turn extended to Andrew's meadow on which the upper 
portion of the village of Thomaston is built — its center standing on 



EABLY NOIirilBURY. ..^ 

" Twich Grass Meadow plain," the meadow of that name lyino- 
below the village. 

In so far as our researches extend, it appears that Isaac Castle 
(a son of the soil, his mother being the daughter of John Richard- 
son) was probably at Northbury soon after the arrival of Cook and 
Rose, for, as early as February, 1728, he sold his house and ten 
acres of land " by the highway that goes to vScott's mountain," to 
Capt. Thomas Judd, and removed to the northward. The present 
railroad bridge at Thomaston is in Isaac Castle's meadow of 1744, 
through which a highway was laid at that date. 

We will not follow in detail the various petitions that were 
sent to the Town and to the .General Assembly that led to the 
formation of the Society of Northbury, but refer the reader to Dr. 
Bronson's " History of Waterbury " and to the Rev. E. B. Hillard's 
article on "The Church in Plymouth," in "The Churches of Matta- 
tuck: 1892. Edited by Joseph Anderson, vS. T. D.," where ma}^ be 
found extended statements. Neither of the above writers however 
seems to have taken notice that the town discriminated in favor of 
the Society at Westbury, and against that at Northbury. 

The first intimation of the desire of the northwest inhabitants 
to absent themselves from the new meeting house during the winter 
months appears, in our Town Records, in the appointment of the 
town deputies to " answer a memorial brought to the General 
Assembly in October, 1732." Not a word is said of opposing it, and 
the court granted the petition by giving liberty to the inhabitants 
to hire a minister to preach the Gospel to them during the months 
asked for, for the space of four years — from 1732 to 1736. Dr. Bron- 
son tells us that in the spring of 1733 (only five months after the 
first petition was granted) the same inhabitants asked the General 
Assembly to set them off as a distinct society. Before the May ses- 
sion at which the above prayer was offered, on April 3, 1733, the 
towm convened for the one purpose of considering the condition of 
the Northern inhabitants, and " agreed by vote that there might be 
a Society in the Northwest Quarter of the bounds of sd. Waterbury 
in a convenient time," and chose "Capt. William Judd, Lieut. Sam- 
uel Hikcox, Mr. Joseph Lewis, Mr. John Sutliff, Mr. Isaac Bronson 
and Capt. William Hikcox as a committee to agree upon and settle 
the bounds between the Society called the North Society and the 
old Town." Three weeks before the above meeting, Wvq proprietors 
held a meeting, at which they sequestered three miles square of 
land— making the center of the sequestered land " the center " of 
the Society that shall there be allowed." This sequestration pre- 
vented the layout of any additional land within that territory, and 
has been considered as an act inimical to the best interests of the 



, , ^ IIISTOn Y OF WA TERB Uli Y. 

proposed society— but there is another view of it that ought, at least, 
to be considered. In 1736 the proprietors had found it necessary 
to look after their timber in the undivided lands "that there might 
be no trespass upon it from out of town men," and in all settlements, 
commons were a vital need. The proprietors of Waterbury had 
abundant commons for the Town vSpot, in which were common past- 
ures, one for horses, and one for cattle, and in which the wood, 
timber and stone were the common property of all the inhabitants, 
and it is abundantly proven that anywhere in the commons men 
built houses both early and late— a right to do so being generally 
respected. Why may we not then consider this sequestration evi- 
dence of paternal regard for the future welfare of the village of 
Wooster ? Many acres had already been laid out within the bounds 
whose title remained to the owners thereof, and it will be remem- 
bered that this secjuestration was made, not by the town, but by the 
owners of the soil. If enacted sjmply to wait for the time of 
increased values, we must consider it a little worldly and advanced 
perhaps, but natural, in view of the sudden and increased demand 
for lands that had arisen. 

March 14, 1734, a town meeting was held, at which " it was voted 
that the inhabitants of the northwest corner of Waterbury shall 
have a liberty without being interrupted by sd town to make their 
application to the General Assembly in May next for a committee 
to appoint a line between the town and the northwest part of the 
town, sd Petitioners being att the charge of the committe." This 
was the only business before the meeting, and Isaac Bronson was 
the moderator. A fortnight later, March 26, 1734, another meeting 
was held, at which Capt. Wm. Hikcox was moderator. At this 
meeting "A rate of a penny of mone}" on the pound was laid to sup- 
ply the town with a stock of powder and lead." After the appoint- 
ment of the collector for the above rate, the meeting adjourned for 
one hour. It met in the afternoon according to adjournment, when 
"the town voted that a committee should be chosen by the town to 
consider the circumstances of the northwest part of the town 
and settle a line in order to make a Society in the northwest part 
of the town and voted that the worshipfuU Joseph Whiting Sqr., 
Cap'. Roger Nuton of Milford, Cap'. John Russel of Branford be a 
committee to consider the circumstances of the town as above sd 
and to settle a line as above sd." The committee was to be called 
in sometime in the March following. In all of the above public 
expressions by the town I fail to find a straw of opposition. That 
nothing should be done in a hurry — seems to be the general tone of 
the town, towards the dwellers on the margin of Wooster vSwamp. 



EARLY NORTIIBURY. 31c) 

October 7, 1734, before the above committee had been "called 
in," a bill was laid before the town meeting " desiring that a com- 
mittee be chosen among themselves to set out the village in the 
northwest Quarter of the Bounds and other villages pertaining to 
the Town." By this, it will be seen that the town was fully alive 
to the fact that disintegration lay before it. The following was the 
bill which was acted upon: 

Whereas att A Town Meeting In Waterbury upon March Last, warned In par- 
ticular for to Grant A Rate for A Town vStock there was some Other things 
Irregularly Done att the same meeting which are ]\Iatters of Weight, and We Judge 
beyond the Jurisdiction of That meeting and also to the Great Dissatisfaction of 
many people we would therefore urge that the same Buisness may be re-considered 
and the votes then past, which seem to be repugnant to the Common Interest of 
the town may be nul'd and made voide— and for the Effecting the buisness there 
In proposed of Setling the Society we chuse a Committee Among our selves to set 
out that and the other villages pertaining to the Town, which we Judge will be 
more Easie and for the better Contentment of the Town In General than to Com- 
mit It to strangers. \^oted in the affirmative. 

It will be noticed that Waterbury still avoided foreign committees 
and that this bill was simply to correct the mistakes that had been 
made, and did not annul the vote relating to the Society. 

Now, at the same meeting in which the above change of com- 
mittee was made regarding the society at Wooster, the Twich 
Grass Meadow people " Henry Cook, Ebenezer Elwell, vSamiiel 
Towner, c^c, laid before the Town a memorial — desiring a liberty to 
hire a Gospel minister for some time the next winter, and having 
their minister's rate abated for the same term of time. The town 
voted they would do nothing in the case." 

The special reason why the town favored present Watertown, 
but seemed reluctant to grant the same extent of privilege to pres- 
ent Thomaston and Plymouth may perhaps be found in the friendly 
and paternal regard it felt for its very own, at Wooster. The peo- 
ple at Twitch Grass Meadow were strangers to the soil and the 
town very evidently wished to keep them closely under its own 
observation, or under that of the hamlet at Wooster. Wooster also 
needed help in sustaining Gospel preaching, and the Up River 
people, then living in present Thomaston, could get to Wooster 
without crossing the Great river. 

The town meeting records are missing at this point for all of the 
year 1735 ^^^ for the larger part of 1736, and we have no proprie- 
tor's records for 1734 after April — none for 1735, '^^d none in 1736 
until the close of the vear. 



CHAPTER XXV. 

EVENTS PRECEDING THE FORMATION OF WESTBURY SOCIETY MR. SOUTH- 

MAYD RESIGNS THE PASTORATE OF THE FIRST CHURCH WEST- 
BURY SOCIETY INCORPORATED— ITS INHABITANTS — HOUSES AT 

OAKVILLE THE EARLY HOUSES OF \VATERTOWN THE SCOTT MILLS 

SCOTT'S MOUNTAIN PATTAROON HILL HIKCOX HILL \VELTON 

HFLL THE REV. JOHN TRUMBULL — OTHER EVENTS. 

THE future historian of Watertown will find an interesting- and 
profitable field in which to glean facts for the rebuilding of 
that township; facts which we may not introduce in this 
mere glance at the past of that portion of ancient Waterbury. The 
old town seems to have been unduly censured for delaying its 
growth; whereas, the town was willing- — far more so than the 
"Colonial Authority," that her eldest child, whose maiden name 
was "Woster" should be introduced to winter privileges, and be 
received into "a separate and distinct " society of its own — its only 
insistence being that every thing be done decently and in /e<^a/ order. 
One cannot avoid admiring the persistent endeavors made by the 
young thing to go alone, and its very audacity in answering nega- 
tive answers with louder knocks of petition seems at last to have 
wearied the General Assembly into consent. The winter of 1737 
must have seemed long to the waiting people, waiting for Capt. 
John Riggs, Capt. Isaac Dickerman and Mr. John Fowler to appear 
and view their surroundings and circumstances, and tell them, 
whether in their judgment, the plan for an ecclesiastical society 
ought to be carried out, and great must have been the disappoint- 
ment — the winter being past and the May session ended — to learn 
that because two of the men named visited Watertown, and the 
third man stayed at home, the Assembly declined to accept the 
report, but appointed another committee to go over the ground, and 
set the bounds for the new society if it pleased them to think there 
should be one. The same men were at the same time to inform the 
town, and if the town chose to have them do it, and in case it was 
willing to pay them the cost of the proceeding, they were to view 
the other parts of the town — present Thomaston and Plymouth — 
and make report of their acts and thoughts in October, 1738. It 
was in September of 1738 that Messrs. John Fowler of Milford, and 
Samuel Bassett and Gideon Johnson of Derby, made the journey to 
Waterbury, where they were met by Deacon Joseph Lewis, Capt. 



EARLY WESTBURY. 321 

Samuel Hikcox, Capt. William Judd, Capt. Timothy Hopkins and 
Mr. Thomas Blackslee, who escorted them through Woster. It was 
no mean journey performed by that committee, as the report 
evidenced. Probably Watertown has never received more import- 
ant visitors, and it is unnecessary to suggest that it was an interesting 
and exciting occasion — for the fate of every man, woman and child 
lay in the hands of the three men. They and they alone could save 
two hundred and thirty-seven persons from journeying every vSun- 
day from the far-away hills and valleys of river and stream to the 
meeting house on Waterbury Green. 

It is impossible to pass in review before the events of this period 
without being impressed with the conviction that Mr. Southmayd's 
heart was burdened and sorrowful beyond hope by the turning 
away of so many feet from his ministrations, and that he was influ- 
enced in his resignation of the pastoral office by passing events, 
although no word of lament appears in the fine and manly docu- 
ment preserved by his own hand in our records, in which he tells 
his people why he must withdraw from the ministry. Mr. South- 
mayd's words spoken in 1737, were explained in 1891, when upon the 
disinterment of his remains, it was found that at the time of his 
death he was unable to turn his head. In view of the above dis- 
covery, the following letter of resignation is of peculiar interest: 

Aprili. 173S. 

To the Deacons and Townsmen in Waterbury to Communicate to the Church and 
Inhabitants of sd Town. 

Beloved Breathren and Neighbours. I the Subscriber, being under great Diffi- 
culty and infirmity of Body and it being such as I fear will never wear off but 
increase and grow upon me which makes my care and concern very Burthensome 
and Distressing, so that the publick work I am engaged in is too much for me and 
having served you under very great Difficulty now almost two years and being 
quite discouraged as to getting well and finding that a sedentary life is very Destruc- 
tive to my health and being very far advanced in years and willing and desirous to 
Retire from my Public work in the ministry in which I have been with you about 
38 years to the best of my ability and am now Desirous to live more privately. I 
take this opportunity for these reasons and many more which might be mentioned 
to signify to you that I am willing and heartily Desirous that you would get some 
person whom you can att'ect and pitch upon to come among you and preach the 
Gospel here and to be with you in order to a settlement as soon as conveniently 
may be In the work of the ministry, and I desire you would be as speedy in the 
thing as may be for I think I cannot serve you any longer, which Request I hope 
you will be most Ready and forward to comply with and Oblidge your friend and 
Distressed Minister who sincerely desires your welfare and prosperity both Spirit- 
ual and temporal and his own Ease and freedom. Desiring the continuance of your 
prayers for me I subscribe myself your well wisher, 

John South.mayd. 
21 



^22 niSTORY OF WATEEBUBY. 

It would seem that a special town meeting" was called on April 
2oth, 1738, to receive the above resignation. The memorial was con- 
sidered and the town voted to call another minister, but requested 
Mr. Southmayd to continue to serve them as far as he was able. It 
then adjourned for five days, and met to appoint a committee, who, 
after seeking the advice of Mr. Southmayd and neighboring elders, 
was to " call " a minister. Under the circumstances it is not surprising 
to find that Mr. Southmayd had not received his full salary for some 
time. In settlement he offered to take ^100 in money and to have 
the use of the Little Pasture as long as he lived. To this proposi- 
tion that christian gentleman added: " If that can't be agreed to, I 
am willing to leave it to some Indifferent persons to say what is 
just and Reasonable to be done and to settle as to temporals between 
me and my People, with whom I have spent the best of my days, 
and abide by their judgement in the case." 

It is pleasant to find that there was not one dissenting voice 
heard in the town meeting, and that Mr. Southmayd's proposal was 
at once accepted. It was at this meeting that the committee was 
appointed to meet the Assembly's committee, and guide them to 
Watertown and Plymouth. 

The committee reported in October, whereupon the General 
Assembly "Resolved: 

That the northwest quarter of Waterbury beginning at the line dividing 
between the towns of Waterbury and Woodbury, at the southwest corner of Capt 
William Judd's great farm, and to continue eastward by the southside of Judd's 
farm to the southeast corner thereof; and from thence to extend to the southeast 
corner of the old farm of Joseph Nickols, late deceased [1733]; and from thence 
northeastwardly unto the place where Williams's corn-mill now stands; from thence 
an eastwardly course to the southwest corner of Jonathan Prindle's farm, including 
the said Prindle's; and from the southeast corner of said Prindle's farm easterly to 
the river, and then to run northerly by the river, the river being the east bounds 
thereof, until it comes where the west Branch enters the mam river and then run- 
ning as the West Branch runs to Litchfield bounds; and then running westerly as 
the line runs between the towns of Waterbury and Litchfield until it comes to 
Woodbury town line, and then running southerly by the line between Waterbury 
and Woodbury to the forementioned corner of Capt. William Judd's farm, shall be, 
and is hereby made, a distinct ecclesiastical society, with the same rights and priv- 
ileges of such societies in this government, and shall hereafter be called and known' 
by the name of Westberry. 

The following list of families, and the number of persons in each family, was 
reported by the committee to be living in 173S within the above bounds. 



John Smith . 


. S 


George Welton, . . 


10 


Ebenezer Richards, 


• 9 


Thomas Foot, 


• • 9 


Samuel Judd. . . 


• 5 


Williain Scovill, 


. 6 


Samuel Thomas, . 


. S 


Crershom Scott, . . 


5 


Thomas Judd, . . 


• 4 


Thomas Hikcox, 


■ • 5 


James Smith, . . 


. 2 


Moses Bronson, . . 


II 


Samuel Luis, 


• 9 


Thomas Richards, 


• 9 


vSamuel Hikcox, 


. 12 



KARLY WESTBUJiY 



323 



Caleb Clark, . . . 


9 


Ebenezer Baldwin, 


• 3 


Daniel How, . . 


• 9 


Jonathan Prindle, 


7 


John Andrews, . . 


6 


Stephen Scott, . . 


• 4 


William Andrews, 


3 


Obadiah Scott, . . 


4 


Jonathan Scott, . . 


3 


David Scott, . . . 


5 


Jonathan Scott, 


7 


Nathaniel Arnold, . 


10 


Eleazer Scott, . . 


3 


Ebenezer Warner, 


• 5 


Jonathan Foot, . 


■ 5 







James Brown, . . 8 

John Warner, ... 4 

James Williams, . 7 

George Nichols, . . 6 

James Belemy, . . i 

Richard Seymour, . 4 

Jonathan Garnsey, . 10 

In 1730 the highway up the valley to present Watertown and to 
Waterville ran over the Naugatiick river, into and across vSteel's 
meadow and up on Steel's plain. On the plain it divided and the 
Waterville, or Pine Hole branch, followed the valley of the Nanga- 
tuck river on the east side of Edmund's mountain, crossing the 
river into Hancock meadow — while the Watertown branch went 
to the west of Edmund's mountain and followed the valley of Steel's 
brook, substantially to Watertown. 

The second house built northwestward of Waterbury- centre, 
was erected before 17 15 at present Oakville, by young Thomas 
Welton, who was the son of John, the planter. He married, in 17 15, 
the record tells us, Hannah AUford and built a house on the north 
side of vSteel's brook, against the upper end of Ben's meadow, and 
southwest of Turkey brook. This was at the fork of the Woster 
and the Scott's mountain roads, and was a lonely habitation, with 
the unbridged river between it and possible succor from the town 
in time of trial. Here, it is thought, Thomas Welton began house- 
keeping with his young wife, for, hereabout, lay his farm and the 
land "on Turkey brook northeast of his hoi:se where said Welton 
formerly ploughed," and here jDrobably occurred the first death in 
Oakville, for Thomas died in 17 17. His house seems to have been 
left desolate until the coming of Isaac Castle in 1724, who lived in 
it four years; sold it in 1728 to Deacon Judd, and moved up to 
Twitch Grass Meadow. Deacon Judd almost immediately conveyed 
it to James Williams, who, in close connection with his brother 
Daniel, built the first inill at Oakville before November of 1729. 
Even at that date, there must have been an old mill there, for in a 
deed given by John Warner to James Williams, land is sold "lying 
by the nctu mill." 

The traveler passing over the " Road to Woster " at any time 
from 172 1 to 1735 would find Ebenezer Richardson living in the 
house next above the one btiilt by Thomas Welton, and, in so far as 
we have investigated, the sanie house still stands and has been 
known for two generations as the " Esquire John Buckingham 
place." What befell Ebenezer in the building his house or other- 
wise we do not know, but the General Assembly ordered the con- 



-,„, HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

stable not to demand his tax rate for 1720— because of the g-reat 
distress to which his lameness had reduced him — but he got the 
better of it evidently for he was a born wanderer and Pine Meadow 
(Reynolds Bridge) called to him in 1737 with clarion tones to come 
up higher. He could not resist either the call or a good chance to 
sell out, for he left his house and barn and two hundred acre farm 
to James Brown, the faithful lover of the Church of Eng-land, and 
the inn-holder of Judd's Meadow, and went up higher. If we had 
any evidence to support the fact, we should write that probably 
Brown built the large house and pursued his calling in it. He 
ultimately conveyed it to his son Daniel, who sold it to Richard 
Nichols. As a token of his adherence to the Church of England, 
we m-ay note that "the listers" for the year 1737, gave, as the last 
item in James Brown's tax list, " 2 acrs meddow Amen." Dr. John 
Warner, a son of the soil, came back from vStratford and before 1724 
built a house, which was across the highway from the Ebenezer 
Richardson house. Mrs. Richardson and Mrs. Warner were sisters. 
On the summit of the hill "south of Lower Wooster," and south of 
what was formerl}' the Candee place Samuel Thomas lived. A 
few years later he died — a soldier in his country's service — at Cape 
" Britton." His house was on the main Watertown road just below 
the " cross " road that comes from Bunker Hill (past Woodruff's) to 
the Watertown road, and was formerly known as the " Road to 
Watertown by James Brown's." Samuel Judd settled between the 
forks of Turkey brook on the upland from whence you can see the 
valley of the brook to the point of its union with Steel's brook. A 
house place, supposed to be his, still remains in the orchard back of 
the house once known as the Eleazer Woodruff place, and later as the 
Sunderland place. It is on the old " Road from Westbury to Bucks 
Hill" — now, the road from the East School house to Watertown. 

Of the vScott family — Stephen's house occupied the present 
site of Deacon Dayton's or J. R. Hickcox's house, which is just 
above Cranberry brook; Eleazer lived opposite St. John's (Roman 
Catholic) church; Gershom, on the east side of the highway above 
the present railroad station, between it and the Methodist church; 
Jonathan, Jr., above Gershom's house and on the same side of the 
road ; Jonathan, Sen., it is believed, on the site of and possibly in 
the house so long known as the Wait Smith house, which is now 
standing and in good repair. Daniel, the youngest son, lived with 
his father. Obadiah Scott lived on the western slope of Hikcox 
hill, on the road from Westbury to Buck's hill and near the foot of 
the hill. This he sold to the Rev. John Trumbull,* who later built 

* Mr. Trumbull, in his later years, owned a number of houses. The one on the east side of the highway 
is the one pictured, and which tradition points to, as the one built by him. 



EARLY WES7'BUBY. 325 

a house below Stephen Scott's on the west side of the highway 
probabl}' represented on the Waterbury sheet of the United States 
Geog-raphical Survey by the house mark just below Cranberry 
brook, and below the Deacon Dayton house. David Scott also 
lived on Hikcox hill. 

The ancient Scott's Mountain — not the hill now called by that 
name — is the culminating- dome of four upward steps to which the 
names of Welton's hill, Pattaroon hill, Hikcox mountain and Scott's 
mountain were early applied. On Scott's mountain, described as " a 
hill between Woster swamp and Buck's meadow," Jonathan and David 
Scott had lands laid out in 1690, but the names of Scott's mountain, 
Hikcox mountain, and Pattaroon hill, date from 1703. Each eleva- 
tion is marked by a depression, not visible when regarded from 
certain points of observation. Standing on West Main street and 
looking up the meadows Scott's mountain rises on the view in a 
fine broad sweep of upland that attracts instant attention. The 
ponderous mass of hills, whose highest uplift is Scott's mountain, 
rises to a height of 920 feet (or sixty feet higher than our 
Long and Chestnut hills). There are few higher elevations within 
the radius of its distance from AVaterbury centre. It was so 
named from grants of land made upon it in 1690 to Jonathan and 
David Scott; to Jonathan to induce him to settle here, and to David 
to encourage him to remain here. Its present name. Nova Scotia 
hill, is not inappropriate as the Scott's possession upon and around 
it became extensive and important, but no evidence has been found 
that a Scott settled upon the mountain at an early date. The first 
house mentioned as being on vScott's mountain was Deacon Thomas 
Hikcox's, in 1728. In 1731 John Judd sold to his brother Thomas 
forty-five acres, with a house on it. The first house on Pattaroon 
hill was built by Daniel Williams in 1730. The exact date when 
Jonathan Scott and his son Jonathan went to present Watertown 
and built their houses is unknown. In March, 1722, Jonathan, Jr. 
had land laid out northward of Scott's mountain — described as 
"east of that called Nonnewage on a brook that falls into Obadiah's 
meadow," and the same day "across Steel's brook, northward of 
W^oster Swamp on the falls of sd brook." At the latter place the 
two Jonathans, father and son, built a saw mill, but it is not men- 
tioned tmtil 1725. Jonathan Sen. built another mill on the eastward 
side of Wooster Swamp. This we learn when a highway was laid 
out from Oakville, at Ebenezer Richardson's house, over the top of 
Hikcox hill to Jonathan Scott's mill. At about the same date, 
there was one laid out to the upper mill. 

One of the earliest mortgages of land in Watertown was on 
sixty-seven acres of the farm of Nathaniel Arnold, Jr. "The 



,26 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Honourable the Governor and Company of this His Majestie's 
Ens>-lish Colony of Connecticut In New England In A merica" lent 
to Arnold seventy-five pounds money, on the 20th of May 1734, for 
which Arnold was to pay on the first of May 1742, "seventy-five 
pounds in silver at twenty shillings per ounce Troy Vv'eight, or in 
Gold, or true bills of publick credit on the Colony." 

As early as 1736 John Guernsey left the Village, selling his house 
and lands to John Smith of East Haddam, who then removed to 
Waterbury. Other land owners in the Village, whose names were 
new, were Jonathan Kelsey, "Zakeriah'' Tomlinson, Jonathan 
Guernsey, vSamuel Umberfield of West Haven, and vSamuel Baker of 
Branford, who built a house there which he sold in 1736 to Thomas 
Foot for three hundred and ten pounds current money. 

The above rapid survey of Watertown and its vicinity at a date 
before the formation of the Ecclesiastical Society of Westbury, 
imperfect as it is, affords us a glimpse of a prosperous community, 
whose founders were already moving on to new territory. Like 
other first settlers Jonathan Scott, Jr., felt the impulse to move on, 
and in 1742 removed to Reynolds Bridge, where he bought the 
house and farm of Ebenezer Richardson, who had made up his 
mind to "go west," to Middlebury. The house was the very site of 
the present red house so long known as the Reynolds homestead. 

It was in October of 1738 that the Society of Westbury was 

incorporated. The number of families enumerated at that time 

was thirty-seven, whose names have been given. At the close of 

1739 nine men had been added to the population. They were 

Joseph Guernsey, Daniel Scott, Nathan Baldwin, John Warner, Jr., 

Stephen Welton, Edmund Tompkins, Edward Scovill, James 

Nichols, Samuel Brown, and Abraham Andrews. The inhabitants 

of Westbury parish must have numbered nearly three hundred, 

when in 1739, Mr. John Trumbull* a young man of twenty-five 

years — was invited by them to take charge of their church. ]\Ir. 

Trumbull was graduated at Yale College in 1735. Dr. Bronson tells 

us that he sometimes fitted young men for college after he became 

minister at Westbur}- — " that his attainments as a scholar were 

respectable, that he was sound, shrewd and humorous, but, that he 

appears not to have been distinguished as a preacher — that the 

great influence he acquired over his people was obtained by his 

generosity, his hospitable manners and friendly intercourse. If 

one of his parishioners had lost a cow or had met with a similar 

calamity he would interest himself in the matter, head a subscrip- 

, *'rhis namt- is, in our records, spelled Trumble— Trumbull not appearing until 176S when Mr. Trumble's 
nephew-cousin, the Rev. Benjamin Trumble, adopted that form of the word. 



EABLY WE^TBUEY. 



327 



tion for his relief and persuade others to sign the same. It was 
said of him that if one of his people turned Episcopalian, he would 
bu}" his farm." 

Mr. Trumbull is described as a stout, athletic man, fond of horses 
— the life of the man who was not fond of horses in that day of utter 
dependence on horses must have been full of bitterness — a lover of 
innocent sports, and willing, if tradition be reliable, to add his skill 
and strength to help the side of his parish boys in games of contest 
with the "Town Spotters." It is said "that the contestants met at 
some half-way place (doubtless the Buckingham place, or James 
Brown's inn, for we find that Brown did jDay five pounds for his 
'faculty' of inn-keeper after his removal to Oakville), and carried 
on their doubtless somewhat brutal game of wrestling, during the 
autumnal evenings, around a fire." The story is told that on one 
occasion when the last of the Westbury champions had been laid 
low, a stranger — Mr. Trumbull in disguise — was dragged in to meet 
the victor, and that the stranger caught his antagonist's foot and 
threw him on the fire. The victor immediately disappeared. 
" Great," adds Dr. Bronson, "was the exploit and great the mystery 
of the affair; but the secret finally leaked out. The story reached 
the ears of Mr. Leavenworth — the new incumbent of the First 
Church Society — who the next time he met his brother ' Trumble ' 
(both men not long past their college days) rebuked him, particu- 
larly, for throwing his rival upon the fire — by which his clothing 
and flesh were scorched. Trumbull agreed that he had been guilty 
of levity, but, as for the scorching, he thought it his duty to give 
his (Mr. Leavenworth's) parishioners a foretaste of what they might 
expect, after sitting under his preaching." 

Rev. John Trumbull was born in Sufiield in 17 15, and was the 
son of Jonathan or John (on our records Jon Trumble), whose 
ancestor from England, settled in Ipswich in 1645. He married 
July 3, 1744, Sarah, the daughter of Mr. Samuel Whitman of Farm- 
ington. They had seven children. John, the fourth child and second 
son was born in April of lyjo, and in vSeptember of ijjy, if the 
Connecticut Gazette of that month and year may be relied upon for 
the fact, had passed a good examination for admittance to Yale 
College, although but seven years and five months old. His mother 
had given him instruction in the Latin language, and his father 
had taken him through a course of preparatory study, which cul- 
minated in a journey to New Haven for the examination. The lad's 
biographer gravely notes that "during all this time "—his first 
seven years^"he was a boy and liked boyish sports." The Gazette 
adds — "but on account of his youth his father does not intend he 
shall at present continue at college. " It is pleasing to learn that 



328 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



after he was graduated at Yale, and at the age of sixteen, young 
Trumbull liked to sit in the highway and scrape up sand-hills with 
other children. We are told * that Mr. Trumbull was ordained at 
the house of Deacon Hikcox, about two miles eastward of the 
churches. Samuel Hikcox, who was Deacon Hikcox at a later date, 
was living at the time on Pattaroon hill, in the house built on the 
hill in 1731 by "Daniel Williams, miller." Four years before he 
was married, Mr. Trumbull bought of Obadiah Scott, for p{:3oo, 
"his home lott on which he then dwelt and all the buildings then 

erected west on highway north on Obadiah Scott, east on Dr. 

John Warner, south on David Scott." This was April 29, 1740, 
and Mr. Southmayd recorded the deed of sale the same day. The 
house stood on the western slope of Hikcox hill, on the road 

from Westbury to Buck's 
Hill near the foot of the 
hill. Mr. Trumbull, at a 
subsequent date, which date 
has not been learned, built a 
house just below Cranberry 
brook, or below Deacon 
Dayton's house of to-day. 
In this house it is supposed 
liis children were born. The 
illustration herewith of the 
house is copied, by the cour- 
tesy of Edwin Whitefield 
from " The Homes of our Forefathers, Rhode Island and Con- 
necticut," wherein the date of the house is given as "about 1725," 
which must be some twenty years too early. 

In October, 1738, the Parish of Westbury was incorporated. On 
the first Monday of December the first parish meeting was held. 
By a two-thirds vote, it was decided to build a meeting house, and, 
perhaps, by a unanimous vote, to seek permission of the General 
Assembly to embody in church estate. In May of 1739 a committee 
was appointed to repair to Westbury and decide for the people 
where the meeting house should stand. In October, the committee 
(Wallingford men) reported that they had repaired to the parish, 
and "had set up a stake with stones laid unto it in the southwest 
corner of Eliezer Scott's barn lot, near to the road or intended high- 
way that ran north and south." The Assembly established the 
place above described "to be the place where said society should 
build their meeting house for the worship of God." 




MdfSE BUILT BY 1 HE KE\ . JOHN TRUMBULL, I740 OR LAHER 



* Connecticut Historical Collections. John Warner Barber, 1838. 



EARLY WESTBTIRY. 



329 



In December of the same year the proprietors held a meeting 
and gave to the committee for laying out highways in the north- 
west quarter full power " to widen the highway where Westbury 
meeting house was appointed to stand so as to accommodate the 
house with a suitable green, and to award satisfaction to the owners 
of the land that the enlarged highway should take from." The 
land laid out in accordance with the above permission was ten rods 
on its soi;th side; ten, on its east side; eleven, on its northern side, 
and eighteen, on its western side. On this land, without having 
obtained a deed of it, the Westbury people proceeded to build. 
April 6, 1 741, the}' had already set up the frame for a meeting 
house, for, at that date Eleazer Scott executed a deed of sale " to 
Mr. John Trumble, Capt. Samuel Hikcox, and Lieut. Thomas 
Richards, and the rest of the inhabitants of the Presbyterian order, 
one piece of land on which they have set up a frame for a meeting 
house for the carrying on the publick [worship] of God in said 
society hi the above sd order y This meeting house green was bounded 
" north on Eleazer Scott's land or the land set for a burying yard, 
east on the Burying yard, south on the highway or Stephen Scott's 
land, and west on land left for a highway." 

The autograph deed of sale of the first burying yard in Water- 
town lies before me. Its date is the same as that of the sale of the 
meeting house place. In it, Eleazer Scott, for six pounds in money 
already received of the town of Waterbury [the proprietors], con- 
veys to " the Second Society in Waterbury known by the name of 
Westbury parish, a certain piece of land for a burying place lying 
by the meeting-house place the east side of sd place — the east side 
17 Rods; the north end 6 Rods; the west side 13 Rods & the south 
end 9 Rods, with a triangle on the north end of the Meeting- 
house place of 22 Rods of Ground." The date when this cemetery 
was first used is not certainly known, but, as its deed of conveyance 
coincides with that of the meeting-house place, and, as our Town 
records give the date of the death of Hannah Richards, the wife of 
William Scovill, as occurring on April i, 1741, and as that name is 
the first of seven names given in a record made by Deacon Timothy 
Judd of deaths in Westbury before July of 1743, we may believe, in 
the absence of conflicting evidence, that this grave made in the 
spring time of 1741 for Mrs. Scovill was the first one in the hill-side 
place of burial that overlooks Wooster Swamp. One can almost 
see that long procession, without hearse, without carriage, winding 
its way down from Scott's Mountain and across the swamp — the 
low bier covered with "funeral cloth " or pall, reverently borne by 
neighbors and friends to its resting place. It is safe to write that 
around that grave clustered the entire community — for its members 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

were not so numerous that one could drop away and leave no sign 
of departure, and the ties of common toil and care and joy still knit 
too-ether the lives of the grandchildren, even as they had done the 
lives of their sires. Like unto that first burial in Naugatuck in 
iyo9— this was that of a young wife and mother. As the bundle of 
straw, according to custom, was dropped into the grave, and the 
skeleton shadow of the meeting-house frame fell over it, four young 
children clustered near. One of the number— a boy of nine years 
named James— was destined to fill an important and high position, 
for in him lay dormant the Reverend James Scovill, missionary of 
the Church of England to his native town, and the Society of West- 
burv. 

THE NORTHEURV SOCIETY. 

While we have lingered at Westbury, the Up River people living 
within two-and-a-half miles of Barnabas Ford's house have not been 
idle. Men like the Blakeslecs, whose grandmother we are told 
"would take her child in her arms on Sabl)ath-day mornings, travel 
from North Haven to New Haven, hear Mr. Pierpont preach, and 
return again after meeting " were not the men to do less than their 
grandmother had done, especially when, as we have seen, horses 
were plentifully distributed throughout the township; whereas she 
is supposed not to have had one in her vSabbath-day journeys to 
the House of God. 

Nevertheless, with petition, prayer and promise, twenty-six men 
besieged Town and Assembly until even the Court wavered and 
yielded in so far as to grant the Up River people permission to have 
and to pay their own minister all the year for two years, and to pay 
no tithes to the First society during that time. John Bronson and 
Obadiah Warner were the only petitioners representing the planters. 

Having received their inch of privilege in October, 173S, these 
importunate demanders asked an ell of liberty in October, 1739. 
They were at court in season, and for once everything moved in 
their favor, for a committee was appointed to visit the town, and, in 
consultation with the First society, to overlook the Up River terri- 
tory and report. The report was made at the same session. The 
committee said that they had viewed and duly inquired into the 
circumstances of the inhabitants and believed them to be able and 
sufficient to bear parish charges and become a distinct society. The 
limits recommended began at two white oak trees known by the 
name of Two Brothers at the northeasterly corner of Westbury 
societ}^, followed the West Branch to the river, the river to the 
mouth of Spruce brook a little below Upson's island; from that 
point a straight line to the falls of Hanc(jx brook; from thence a 



EARLY WESTBURY. 



331 



straight line to the south side of Mr. Noyes' farm lying on Grassy 
hill, thence a due east line to Farmington line, then north by that 
line to Harwinton bounds and Litchfield bounds to the first bounds 
mentioned. Within the above bounds, the society or parish was 
incorj^orated — to be known and called by the Parish of Northbury. 

The thoughtful reader will at once recognize that the formation 
of the above societies would necessarily involve the own in cost, 
trouble, and well-nigh hopeless endeavor to determine the respect- 
ive bounds of the new societies with Farmington, Hartford, Har- 
winton and Litchfield. It had not l^een the custom to perambulate 
the bounds year by year, and in process of time old landmarks 
became lost, forgotten or obliterated. vSo long as the margins of the 
towns did not conflict in anyway and the lands lay in commons, 
slight deviations made comparativel}^ little difference. Out of this 
difficulty arising from uncertain and lost bounds and mutual care- 
lessness, town-line roads led the way. 

In May of 1741, the indulgent General Assembly had occasion to 
repent having yielded to the prayers and petitions of Northbury 
and to wish that it had relied upon the wisdom of the First society, 
for a plaint went up to it "of the broken and confused circum- 
stances" that the parish of Northbury was under in all its public 
affairs. It had neither any regular society meeting nor officers, and 
that it might "not be further involved in difficulties and ruined," 
Col. Benjamin Hall, and Capt. John Riggsof Derby, were appointed 
to repair to said society with full power to govern the people and 
direct them into the ways of propriety and peace. The society and 
all the inhabitants thereof were required " to conform themselves 
to the advice and direction of the committee in every respect, on 
pain of incurring the great displeasure of the Assembl5^" 

The temptation to linger along the ways trod by the Northbury 
people during the pastorate of the Reverend vSamuel Todd is most 
alluring; for place, pastor and people furnish abundant and uniqiie 
material for the pen of the gleaner, who will surely not omit to 
mention (unless it has already been given), that the first paragraph 
of the Northbury Church records now extant (November 27, 1765) 
contains the following vote: "Any member of Regular Standing in 
the Church of England shall be admitted to Occasional Communion 
with us in this church for the time to come." The second announces 
that "the Church of Christ in the Society of Northbury was formed 
about the year 1739. The Rev. Samuel Todd was pastor of the 
Church until 1764, then was dismissed from his charge. After 
which, he Refused giving the Church any account of their proceed- 
ings under his pastoral charge — their Remaineth no Record." 



CHAPTER XXVI. 

UNION SQUARE — DEATH OF ABRAHAM ANDREWS NEW INHABITANTS 

FIRST BRIDGE OVER THE NAUGATUCK RIVER LEASE OF SCHOOL 

LANDS SCHOOL MONEY MR. SOUTHMAYD'S GIFT TO NORTHBURY 

XHE REV. JONATHAN ARNOLD OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND 

RECEIVES MINISTERIAL TAXES THE REV. MARK LEAVENWORTH 

OXFORD PARISH ORGANIZED CHURCH OF ENGLAND MEN OF 1 748. 

IHE "GREAT AWAKENING" THE REV. JAMES DAVENPORT 

MISSING RECORDS THE MINISTRY LANDS EXCHANGED FOR LAND 

AT THE CLAY PITS — SCHOOL FUND KILLING DEER — REBUILDING 

THE BRIDGE — THE CASE OF JOSEPH GENNINGS. 

WHILE we have lingered at the northward, events have 
occurred at the heart of the township that are worthy of 
mention. Union ^Square was at an early date a centre of 
activity, if not the business centre of the town. Here was the corn- 
mill, the Mecca where the material bread of life was ground out for 
all the inhabitants; here was a saw-mill, and here, it is thought, 
was the tannery that the tow^i encouraged Abraham Andrews to 
build. Here Joseph Lewis lived, weaving cloth for ten or twelve 
years before he removed to the Straits mountain at Judd's meadows, 
to raise rye for export; and here came, m.orning and evening, the 
drifts of cattle to and from their pasture lands over the Mill river, 
passing on their way between the houses of Abraham Andrews, 
Senior, on the south (on land where Mr. Edward Terrell now lives), 
and Abraham Andrews, Junior, on Union Scjuare itself on the left 
(for his house was surrounded by highways). The highways there- 
about were changed almost with the seasons; so difficult is it to 
thread their mazes that one becomes highway-blind in the attempt. 
Abraham Andrews' orchard was a certain number of feet from the 
north bound of Grand street when that street was reopened in 1709 
from Bank street to the Mill river; and in later years it became the 
property of Joshua Porter and afterwards it was long in the owner- 
ship of his daughter Hepsibah. 

In the house that he had built in 1704, Abraham Andrews died 
in 1 731. He was the last survivor of the signers of 1674. 

During the period from 1731 to 1742, new inhabitants came pour- 
ing their wealth of family life and possession into the township. 
They came singly and in family groups of two, three, and occasion- 
ally four brothers. In addition to the names of men already given 



EVENTS FROM 1:J2 TO 1:41. --^ 

as having arrived at Westbury and Northbury, we find those of 
Lothrop, Rew, Weed, Merrill, Punderson, Baldwin, Beard, Camp, 
Atwell, North, Curtiss, Foot, Hubbard, Nichols, Sanford, Prichard, 
Gunn, Sherman, How, Matthews, Adams, Baker, Frost, Holbrook, 
Humiston, Johnson, vSmith, Coxwell, Williams, Moor, Royse, Terrill, 
Doolittle, Gordon, Prindle, Thompson, Truck, Bellamy, Earl, Harri- 
son, Hotchkiss, Luddington, Osborne, Seymour, Trowbridge, North, 
Preston, Tompkins, Silkrig, Wakelin, Hull, Trowbridge, and perhaps 
others. 

Despite all this increase of population the proprietors kept on 
their unwavering course, meeting the changed conditions with 
unchanged front. Now and again the town would welcome a new 
man to its list of office-holders — to keep the pound ke}^, or, possibly, 
to view the common fence, or to dig the graves — but seldom to its 
higher oiifices until he had been well tried. 

It is not possible to follow clearly the progress of events, because 
of the missing links in the records. It does not appear at what 
time the second school house was built, for we find no account of 
the disposition that was made of the timber drawn to the " Meeting 
House Green" for it, in 1732. We have no record from January, 1734, 
to December, 1736, and it was probably during the interim that it 
was built. 

The first bridge across the Naugatuck river at West Main street 
was also built during that interval. The intimation of it comes 
through the laying of a tax "to pay the charges of the bridge." 
This was in 1736. Five years later the freshet must have carried it 
away, for in March it was voted to repair the bridge over our river, 
and three men were appointed " to look after and save what timber 
could be found." 

Under date of December 10, 1734, we find the following return 
of a committee in relation to school lands: 

W.e the subscribers being desired to consult the best method for the 
school land in Waterbury, and our judgment is that a committee be appointed to 
make sale of all the school land and propriety belonging to the same, and that said 
committee make sale of all the meadow lots to the highest bidder at some public 
time and be impowered to give deeds to such persons — which deeds shall be held 
good for nine hundred and ninety-nine years and that the buyer shall pay the 
money down or mortgage lands for the security of the principle and give bonds 
yearly for the interest of such sums as he shall give for such particular lands as he 
shall so buy * * * * # ^^^ ^j^^^ ^j^g ^gg q£ ^j^g money which the 
above said land shall fetch shall be converted to the use of the school in said Town 
for the said term of nine hundred ninety-nine years. 

( Joseph Lewis, 
Committee, - William Judd, 

( Samll Hikcox. 
The above Written Bill was passed into a vote. 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

John Bronson immediately secured the school land in Buck's 
meadow, for forty shillings and one penny an acre — Deacon Samuel 
Brown "four acres in Handcox meadow, for fifty-four pounds ten 
shillings good and lawful money," and soon very many acres of 
school lands were leased for nine hundred and ninety-nine years, 
on merely nominal terms— for school lands were abundant and had. 
with the exception of the meadow allotments — lain unimproved 
from the time of the various land divisions. By 1734 the school 
lands must have numbered well nigh a thousand acres. Nearly 
two vears pass away without record, and then the following entry 
is found: 

Whereas there was considerable discourse about letting out the school money 
which the school land was sold for as often as there should any of the principle be 
paid in, that it mii,dit not lie unimproved, the town by their vote agreed and im- 
powered their school committee to let out the money to such as want to hire and to 
take double security by mortgage for the principle, which mortgages are to run to 
the school committee for the time being, and to take their notes or bonds for the 
interest to run to the school committee as above, so to be disposed and improved 
to the use of the school in Waterbury for ever. 

The bonds were to be lodged in the " Town Treasurers office," the 
treasurer giving a receipt for them. Deacon Thomas Clark held the 
office in 1736. In 1738 the town appointed " the town clerk to be with, 
and to take care with the school committee in letting out the school 
money and taking security, as there should be occasion." The town 
clerk's was the only permanent office in the town — Mr. Southmayd 
having held it since 172 1. The eleventh of December, 1738, must 
have been a cold day, for after the above vote (in the meeting house) 
the meeting adjourned for one hotir — -''to meet at Captain Timothy 
Hopkins" — where they chose eight men as school committee, Lieut. 
Thomas Bronson as town treasurer, and decided that the ;^ioo that 
had been agreed upon (on his retirement from the ministry), to be 
paid to Mr. Southmayd in 1740, should be laid upon the list of 1738. 
Prudent, thoughtful men ! This act included their neighbors at 
Westbury and Northbury as participants in the indebtedness. Per- 
haps it was in recognition of this, that Mr. Southmayd gave the 
men of Northbury, the same year " one acre of land for publick 
use," on which was "a house which the said inhabitants had already 
set up under the denomination of a school house, or a house for the 
said inhabitants to meet in to carry on the public worship of God 
on the vSabbath when they [should] have the means among them." 

In 1740 we learn for the first time that there are Professors of 
the Church of England in Waterbury, and that services according 
to the prescribed forms of that church have been held, by the 



EVENTS EIWM i:.!.' TO 1741. • t^t^c 

Reverend Jonathan Arnold. Under date of April 14, 1740 that 
o-entlenian sent the following acknowledgment: 

To the Collectors of the M/tn'sler/al Charges in Watcrbitrv. 

Then Received of the Professors of the Church of England in Waterbury the 
Areas of what is Due of their Ministerial Taxes to my satisfaction and Request 
you will Give them a Discharge. I am 

Your Humble Servant, 

Jonathan Arnold. 

The same professors of the Church of England soon sought, at 
the hands of the proprietors of the township, land whereon to build 
their churcli edifice — the story of which will be told in connection 
with the history of that church in Waterbury. It is with especial 
gratification that we are able to add that no family dissension 
appears to have marred the peacefulness of the departure in the 
fullness of time of the children of the meeting-house for the little 
church on the corner of North Willow and West Main streets. 

The entrance of the Reverend Mark Leavenworth into the work 
laid down by Mr. vSouthmayd seems to have been so natural and 
cpiiet, that a ripple of the change of oarsmen failed to strike the 
shore where we search the sands for signs of tides that rose and 
fell so long ago. Truth compels us however to admit that there are 
neither town, proprietors, nor church records covering the period 
of his ordination, which Dr. Bronson tells us was in March of 1740. 
Among the papers of the Rev. Isaac wStiles of North Haven is one 
announcing that he gave the " Right hand of fellowship " at the 
ordination of Mr. Leavenworth, and that he preached the sermon 
at the ordination of Mr. Todd at Northbury, but no dates are given. 

In 1740 certain inhabitants who were " dwelling in the southwest 
part of Waterbury woods," together wath certain inhabitants of 
Derby and of " the southeast part of the township of Woodbury 
woods " petitioned in the usual formula that they might become 
one entire, distinct, ecclesiastical society. Isaac Trowbridge, the 
three brothers John, Jonas, and Joseph Weed, and Joseph Osborne 
were the petitioners living in the Waterbury woods. 

Within less than three years four parishes were formed, whose 
members went out from the old First Church — Westbury, North- 
bury, Oxford in part, and St. James's, now St. John's. Of the latter 
parish, the earliest list of members known to be extant is found in 
a town rate-book of the tax-payers for the year 1748— and of the 
forty -three men listed as churchmen, thirty -six were in Water- 
bury at the formation of the parish— of the thirty-six, twenty-four 
were born here and brought up in the First Church, being lineal 
descendants of the planters— thirty had been in the same church 



_. • HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

for nearly a score of years. Of the remaining six members, Caleb 
Thompson, Georjje Nichols and Robert Johnson must have been 
attendants' at least ten years, and Nathaniel Gunn six years— while 
John Brown was the son of Samuel Brown, deacon in the First 
Church from 1730 to about 1735; leaving William " Silkrig " as the 
only new comer, and he had been here two years in 1740. vSurely 
these churches ought to love one another, for they are bound 
together by all the ties of a century of existence. 

" No town history of Connecticiit can avoid the mention of the 
o-reat excitement and its consequent train of events that convulsed 
the churches in 1740, and later. Public opinion seems to have pre- 
pared the way for a great awakening of the people to the religious 
duties of the hour. In this " Revival " great good was accomplished, 
and great wrong was wrought. The special feature of it that it is 
necessary to introduce here is the fact of the change it eifected in 
the status of the ancient churches of the colony. Hitherto, the 
teaching and the preaching had been exclusively in the hands of 
an educated and ordained ministry, there being only " standing 
ministers" in the land. While this "Great Awakening" was in 
progress, the Rev. James Davenport, from Southold, L. I., visited 
Connecticut. He is described by one who witnessed his work, as " a 
wonderful, strange, good man, under the influence of a false spirit. 
He not only gave an unrestrained liberty to noise and outcry both 
of distress and joy in time of divine service, but promoted both 
with all his might. Those persons that passed immediately from 
great distress to great joy and delight, after asking them a few 
questions were instantly proclaimed converts, or said to have come 
to Christ, and upon it the assembly were told that a nmnber, it may 
be ten or fifteen, have come to Christ already, who will come next ? 
He was a great encourager if not the first setter up of public 
exhorters, encouraging any lively, zealous Christian to exhort with 
all the air and assurance of ministerial authoritative exhorting — 
although altogether unequal to the solemn undertaking." The 
exhorters came into credit among multitudes of people who chose 
to hear them rather than their old teachers, whom Mr. Davenport 
referred to as "the letter-learned rabbles, scribes and pharisees and 
unconverted ministers." Very soon " the standing ministers began 
to fall in their credit and esteem among the people, and thus the 
seeds of discord and disunion were sown, and a foundation laid for 
separations." Mr. Davenport made a tour of the churches, examin- 
ing the ministers in private — such of them as submitted to his 
questions — and then publicly declared his judgment of their spirit- 
ual state as converted, or unconverted. Multitudes believed in Mr 



EVENTS FROM 1732 TO 1741. 

Davenport as a man who had inquired at the oracle of God and " a 
minister could not gainsay or correct his wildest and most unscript- 
ural words under the price of his reputation." People who had o-reat 
regard for their ministers were as much concerned lest they should 
not stand the trial of j\Ir. Davenport's examinations, "as if they 
were going before the Judge of all the Earth." 

In May of 1742, two men of vStratford made complaint Ho the 
Assembly of disorders happening in that town " by occasion of one 
James Davenport convening great numbers of people too-ether in 
several parts of said town." Mr. Davenport was brought to trial 
the King's attorney producing evidence to prove the complaint and 
Mr. Davenport appearing in his own behalf and with witnesses 
" The court observing the behaviour, conduct, language and deport- 
ment of Davenport in the time of his tryal and what happened in 
the evening after the matter was in hearing and not gone throuo-h 
with," made the following announcement: "This Assembly is of 
opinion that the things alleged and the behaviour, conduct, and 
doctrines advanced and taught by the said James Davenport do 
and have a natural tendency to disturb and destroy the peace and 
order of this government. It appears to this Assembly that the 
said Davenport is under the influences of enthusiastical impression 
and impulses, and thereby disturbed in the rational faculties of his 
mind, and therefore to be pitied and compassionated, and not to be 
treated as otherwise he might be." Mr. Davenport was, by order of 
the court, removed to his home at Southold. 

In the light of the above events, it will appear that the rigid 
supremacy of the established church of the colony was gone for- 
ever. Notwithstanding the fact that Mr. Davenport afterward 
returned to Connecticut clothed in his right mind, admitted his 
errors, and sought forgiveness of the ministers whom he had treated 
amiss, the people declared that " he was turned against them and 
was become their enemy — that he had got away from God and 
joined in a great measure with the world of opposers and carnal 
ministers. They were disappointed, vexed, disquieted in their 
spirits, and, on the whole, they all rejected his message."* 

Into conditions that are only hinted at in the foregoing allusions 
Mr. Leavenworth, Mr. Trumbull and Mr. Todd were brought at the 
beginning of their pastorates. Each pastor and each parishioner 
was under the rule of his own mind and the spell of his own tem- 
perament while passing through the scenes of the " Great Awaken- 
ing." The new order of things had its attractions and its repul- 
sions; and without doubt worked its way in some degree into every 

* The Rev. Joseph Fish, Stonington, 1740-1763. 



S HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

meetino--house in the colon3\ That it wrought to the benefit of the 
Church of Eno-land there can be no question — many of the staunch- 
est Congreg-ationalists making the very highest type of Episcopal- 
•ians while the most ardent followers of Davenport and the en- 
thusiasms of religious exaltation seceded in the opposite direction 
in order to form new societies in accord therewith. The General 
Assembly enacted vigorous laws in the endeavor to restrain minis- 
ters from going into other parishes than their own to preach, with- 
out invitation from church or minister, and in various ways sought 
to quell the spirit of rebellion that had come into action against the 
established order. All town, church, and society records relating 
to the years in question being lost, it is impossible to give local 
facts, but there are indications that Mr. Leavenworth and Mr. 
Todd, both young and impulsive men, sympathized with the new 
order of things. Dr. Bronson, whose information was derived 
from the manuscripts of the late Judge Bennet Bronson, tells us 
that " some of the meetings of the New Lights were extremely 
boisterous and disorderly, so that on one occasion John vSouthmayd 
Jr., a constable of the town, felt himself justified in appearing in 
their meeting and commanding the peace of the commonwealth." 
This must have been as early as 1742. Tracy, in his "Great 
Awakening," makes the statement that in 1744 the Association of 
New Haven County suspended the Messrs. Humphreys of Derby, 
Leavenworth of Waterbury, and Todd of Northbury from the 
ministry, for assisting in the ordination of the Rev. Jonathan Lee, 
on which occasion Mr. Leavenworth " preached the ordination 
sermon." Stephen Hopkins accompanied him, as " worthy mes- 
senger " from the Waterbury Church. Mr. Todd made the last 
prayer with imposition of hands, and gave the right hand of 
fellowship" — while the worthy messenger from the Northbury 
Society was Moses Blakeslee. In fact, the trio of ministers from 
the Naugatuck Valley formed the " Select Council," and ordained 
Mr. Lee — who later received from the General Assembly an invita- 
tion or appointment to preach the Election Sermon, which is 
sufficient evidence that his ordination was ultimately considered 
according to " Law and Order." The first appearance in the public 
records of Mr. Leavenworth's name is when the ear-marks of his 
cattle are given in April of 1741 — they were "three half-pennies on 
the foreside of the near ear;" Mr. Todd's name first appears in the 
same manner before December, 1740 — his cattle-marks being " a slit 
in the top of each ear and a half-penny the foreside each ear." Mr. 
Trumble's name appears in 1745, when Mr. Southmayd records: 
"the [town] meeting opened by prayer and supplication by the 
Rev. Mr. John Trumble." 



EVENTS FROM 1733 TO 1741. ^^o 

Among- the lost records was one appointing a committee to 
sell the ministry land; for we find it, later, ordered to "recover 
damages of persons who had bought of it and refused to stand by 
their bargain." Mr. Southmayd was appointed "to keep the notes 
and bonds of interest that the ministry land was sold for and 
deliver the same to the several societies' committees ^tV/t-// orderly called 
for." It was also "voted to sell the remainder of the ministry land 
— if under circumstances that it may be sold." It may have been because 
the previous sales of ministry land were held to be invalid, that 
the purchasers had declined to receive them. Nevertheless in 
1741 "it was agreed that the remainder of the ministry land 
sequestered by the Grand Committee may be sold, and the use 
of the money be to the use of the ministry in said Waterbury." 
The " remainder of the ministry land " referred to the one-sixth 
part, or its representative, of all that part of our city bounded 
to-day by Bank street on the west. East Main street on the north, 
South Elm street on the east, and Grand and Union streets on the 
south. This, after several changes within the botmds named, was 
leased on December 17, 1722, to Samuel Porter and Thomas Upson. 
In 1728 the town allowed Thomas Porter to have this ministry land, 
if he would give in exchange for it " two acres for one, of his land 
lying above the Clay pitts." * What became of this ministry land, 
and how in 1738 Thomas Porter had become possessed of it has not 
been investigated. Fortunately, the Little Pasture was safe in the 
life-keeping of Mr. Southmayd at this time. 

When in 1689 the General Court feared the coming of Governor 
Andros, it will be remembered that it made haste to give to Wind- 
sor and Hartford the large tract of lands lying west of their town- 
ships and extending to the Housatonic river. In the subsequent 
complication of interests between the colony and the towns, it was 
settled that the colony should have returned to it certain lands, 
which lands were divided into seven townships; each township was 
divided into a certain number of rights, varying from thirty to fifty 
pounds per right, and these were sold at public auction at the sev- 
eral court houses in the several counties. The money obtained 
from the sales was to be used for the benefit of such towns as had 

* As clearly as the records permit us to locate the " Clay Pitts," they were on or near the Little brook, 
north of Grove street, and between Cook and North .Main streets. In 1687, Sergeant Samuel Hikcox had 
♦' one piece at the Clay Pitts," bounded south and west on highways— which would be at the corner of Grove 
and Cook streets. In 1738 Nathan Beard became the owner of "one piece at the Clay Pitts, containing two 
acres, bounded south and east on highways, north on the parsotiage land helonging'to Thomas Porter and 
Southmayd's land, west on Judd's land." South of Grove street, the second Joseph Hikcox owned a triangle 
of two acres, bounded by Grove, North Main, and Cook streets (except for a strip of land on the Cook street 
side, belonging to George Scott), and, in receiving the grant, the condition was that Hikcox was "not to 
hinder men coming to the Clay Pitts." 



.,o HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

in 1732, made and computed the lists of their polls and rateable 
estate. Each town was to receive the money according to the pro- 
portion of its list in that year, and each parish in proportion to its 
own list given in in that year — the money to be let out, and the 
interest improved for the support of the respective schools forever, 
and to no other use. If applied to other use than for the support 
of a school in the town, then the money was to be returned into the 
treasury of the colony, and the town or parish misimproving it was 
to forever lose the benefit thereof. Such was the origin of the 
present Connecticut School Fund. 

There had been no parish formed in 1732 in Waterbury, but 
the list of the Northern inhabitants, it will be remembered, was 
returned in that year under the head of Northbury, and perhaps in 
anticipation of this event, for the practice was not continued. 
However that may have been, the subject of the "Western-lands" 
school money was one that disquieted the First Society and the two 
parishes until 1741, when the services of Col. James Wadsworth and 
Col. Benjamin Hall were solicited and the whole matter was to be 
left with them for their decision, and so the trouble was put 
aside for ten years. The school-money had, undoubtedly, been 
used by Northbury to pay ministerial charges. At the same meet- 
ing, Daniel Scott (of Westbury), Ebenezer Elwell, and Gideon 
Allyn (of Northbury) — all of whom had been fined for killing deer 
(either out of season or within a deer-park) — prayed that their fines 
for so doing might be abated, but the prayers were of no avail. 
Laws were made to be respected in 1741. 

In the same year we find this entry: " they made choice of a 
committee (Capt. Wm. Judd, Lieut. Stephen Upson and John Judd) 
to go about re-building our bridge over our river in the Country 
road to Woodbury." Directions were given for taking advice as to 
the form or manner in which the bridge should be built, and leave 
was given the committee " to hire it done by the Grale or other- 
wise," as the members should agree. 

At this meeting, Mr. Southmayd and Capt. Samuel Hikcox 
were appointed to represent the town at the County court in 
" an action there depending concerning Joseph Gennings becast 
upon us by Farmington." Farmington probably won the case, for 
the outcome of it lies before me in the form of an indenture 
executed the same month— March, 1742. It was prepared by Mr. 
Southmayd— signed by Joseph Jenners and Samuel Hickcox and 
witnessed by John Warner, Elnatha Bronson, and William Hick- 
cox. It contains the usual formula wherein: " I Joseph Gennings 
do put and bind myself a servant man unto Capt. Samuel Hickcox 



EVENTS FROM 1732 TO 17Jfl. 341 

to live with him the full term of five years — all of which term the 
said Gennings his said master shall faithfully serve according- to 
the best of his Ability, his secrets Keep Close, his Lawful and 
reasonable Commands Everywhere Gladly do and perform. Damage 
to his Master he shall not wilfully do, his Master's Goods he shall 
not waste Embesel or purloine nor suffer the same to be wasted or 
Purloined, but to his power shall forthwith discover and make 
known to his said Master." After the usual negative promises re- 
garding taverns, games, etc., on the part of Gennings, appears Cap- 
tain Hickcox's agreement. He had evidently given a bond to the 
town to save it from charge regarding Gennings. Captain Hickcox 
promised according to the usual formula regarding meat, drink, 
lodging and apparel during the five years, promising to dismiss 
Gennings "at the end of said term Except three indifferent persons, 
two chosen by the Master and o/ic by the servant should adjudge 
that the master had not had sufficient Recompence for his charge 
and trouble — and then Jenness, or Gennings, was not to dispose of 
himself without securing his master from one bond, wherein he was 
bound to secure the town of Waterbury from being a charge to 
them." Before the document was signed, another hand than Mr. 
Southmayd's added that neither Captain Hickcox nor his "hiers " 
were to dispose of Gennings to any person whatsoever without the 
servant's free consent. We will hope that Mary Hopkins, the wife 
of Capt. Samuel Hickcox, proved a gentle mistress to poor Joseph 
and that he escaped service, and bondage likewise, in due time. 



CHAPTER XXVII. 

ATTACHMENT OF THE INDIAN OWNERS TO THE LAND BUTLER — EARLY 

GRANTS SAMUEL HIKCOX SITE OF HIS HOUSE AGREEMENT WITH 

HIS BROTHER THOMAS DANIEL WARNER's HOUSE HIKCOX's FULL- 
ING MILL — NAUGATUCK'S FIRST TWO SETTLERS DIE IN 1713— 
INHABITANTS BEFORE 1 745- 



NT O section of our ancient township invites to indulgence in 
J Speculation more enticingly than does that now known by 
the name of Naugatuck. The historical facts that we do 
know, combined with the seeming allusions to other possible facts, 
reveal the temptations which historians meet to construct theories 
and indulge in the belief of them until they are left to hand them 
down to their readers as well-founded truths. 

The natural gateway of the hills leading into the Straits of the 
Naugatuck, and its vicinage on Beacon Hill brook, called by the 
Indians Wecobemeas, had long been to the aborigines a favored 
region, and when the planters from Mattatuck appeared on the 
scene to gather hay and build yards for cattle, its original owners 
were inclined to assert their ownership. The familiarity of the 
Indians with each valley and hill was attested by the names which 
they knew them by, and which are repeated in the outcome of 
the treaty made between their owners and the men of Mattatuck 
in 1684. 

The autograph deed* with its ten marks and its ten red seals 
made by eight dusky men and two dusky women, more than two 
centuries ago, lies before me — the deed by which they gave away, 
by name, twenty parcels of land — nine of them lying on the east 
side of the river between Beacon Hill brook, and the Fulling Mill 
brook at Union City. There is something of the old Hebrew 
grandeur of expression in the wording of this conveyance: " Weco- 
bemeas, the land upon the brook or small river that comes through 
the straits north of Lebanon and falls into Naugatuck river at the 
south end of Mattatuck bounds, called by the English Beacon Hill 
brook — and all the lands lying between that and the brook, called 
by the name Squontuck, that comes from the east and falls into the 
river at the hither end of Judd's Meadow." But alas ! We have no 

* See page 192. 



TEE SETTLEMENT AT JUDD'S MEADOWS. 



343 



interpreter to give us the meaning of Wecobenieas, Wachu, 
Panootan, or any one of the twenty parcels "by their names dis- 
tinguished." 

The following view is given as seen from the ledge on which 
the ancient bound trees stand, called the " Three Brothers." 



w 



I -W* 




THE VALLEY OF THE SMALL RIVER THAT COMES llIkOUGH THE STRAITS NORTHWARD iH LELANu;,. 



But we have reason to think that at least one white man dwelt 
in Naugatuck before the planters received the deed referred to. 
One Butler — perhaps a lonely Quaker — had wandered hither and 
built him a house in a sheltered and picturesque nook by an excel- 
lent spring of water within sound of the brook which bore his name 
— now Long Meadow brook. Of him we know only that the pro- 
prietor's records mention " Butler's house — Butler's House brook — 
Where Butler's house was." If we admit that he was a Quaker who 
had retired from active persecution to the wilderness, it is a simple 
matter to infer that as soon as the Puritans up the valley began 
their descent upon the meadows near his chosen habitation that he, 
being a man not given to contention, quietly closed his door and 
retired to the spot long known as "the Quaker's farm," or, in 
modern rendering, Quaker's Farms. Tradition has erroneously 
bestowed the naming of this region to Dr. John Butler of vStratford, 



344 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

who owned the tract at a later date, and who it is easily proven 
could not have been the Butler of Judd's Meadows, or the person 
who gave the name to the Quaker's Farm. 

Judd's Meadows extended from Derby line to the upper limits 
of the valleys of Hop brook and Fulling Mill brook. In the words 
of the aboriginal proprietors, "from Saugasset to Squontuck and 
Achetayquopaug" — inclusive as to the last two. 

The earliest known occupation of the meadows and uplands by 
the planters was for the use of their cattle. This information 
comes through grants that were made, some of which remain of 
record. In 1699 Abraham Andrews received one "on the brook that 
runs through Benjamin Barnes's yard." This was neither a "door- 
yard " nor a yard for drying cloth, but an enclosure for cattle, 
designed to keep them in safety from wolves or other wild animals 
at night during the season of pasturage — a herdsman attending 
them during the day. The brook that ran through Benjamin 
Barnes's yard is that now insignificant stream along which the 
highway winds from Union City to the New England Railway 
station. 

This region was subdivided by the English into meadows that 
were owned by certain of the proprietors — as Andrews's meadow at 
Union City west of the river — Welton's lot up Hop brook under the 
hills just above Andrews's meadow — the Deacon's meadow at the 
upper part of Naugatuck village and extending down to, if not 
below the bridge — Scott's meadow below the manufactory of L. & W. 
Ward. All of the above were the west side of the river. On the 
east side, across the highway from Grove cemetery (which is in 
Wecobemeas), lay " Ben. Jones's" lot. Hickox meadow was oppo- 
site the Ward manufactory, north of the river at the bend near the 
"Old Canoe Place." Above the burying-yard of 1709, was Thomas 
Warner's allotment. The miller, John Hopkins, obtained his por- 
tion of meadow at the lower extremity of the valley in the midst of 
a section of country naturally adapted to the raising of rye, an 
industry which at a later day became a leading specialty in that 
region—kilns being erected for drying the grain for shipment to 
foreign countries. Being comparatively near New Haven, the prin- 
cipal shipping port, the naturally superior lands in that vicinity 
were reckoned among the most valuable in the township for that 
purpose, and were appraised a hundred and forty years ago for 
more than their market value at the present time — that is, the river 
lands and those immediately adjacent, just above the straits. From 
the rapid and extensive spread of the landed possessions of the 
Hopkins and the Lewis families in all the region 'round about, 



THE SETTLEMENT AT JUDD'S MEADOWS. 345 

the raising- of rye must have proved a lucrative business in 
those days. 

Samuel Hikcox, the son of Sergt. Samuel, deceased, had in 1702 
a house at Judd's Meadows. The following is the grant that tells of 
its having been built : "Dec. 21,1702. They granted Samuel Hikcox 
eight acres of land at Judd's Meadows against Hikcox meadow, 
where he has set his house, to take it about his house." He had 
probably followed a custom of that period and built his house 
before obtaining the land. This house was on the hill on the east 
side of the New Haven road of 1686, on the north side of the lower 
brook of the two that cross the road and run westward to the river, 
and occupied the site where Amos Culver lives. Because the house 
is mentioned in that year, he is accounted as the first permanent 
settler of Judd's Meadows. From the following ancient autograph 
agreement (fot:nd in 1890), between Samuel and his brother Thomas, 
it would seem probable that the house had not been inhabited in 
May of 1704, for the " chimblys " were only begun, and his barn was 
in building at that time. Consequently, Daniel Warner may have 
been his neighbor in the removal. The following is the bargain, 
which from the outline of the paper, seems to have been an indent- 
ured agreement. It was written by Thomas Judd, Jr. 

This writing made May = i = 1704 witnesseth; That we Sam" Hikcox and 
Thomas hikcox, both of Waterbury, by way of exchange have bargained as 
follows. First, that I sd Sam" Hikcox by way of exchange have sold to sd Tho-s 
Hikcox as follows, my house and house lot situated in said Waterbury [with 
bounds] ; three roods at the lower end of Munhan [bounds] ; ten acres at Hikcox 
mountain [bounds]. 2ly, I sd Thomas Hikcox have for the fore sd bargain sold to 
sd Sam", eight acres lying at Judd's Meadows in two pieces on the hill north from sd 
Sam"'s house butting on highway west ; elsewhere on common — the other piece 
being one acers and fourscore rods butting on the highway east ; elsewhere on 
common. ]\Iore, my whole right of that land at Judd's Meadows that was father 
Hilvcox's, and said Thomas is to finish the barn that he has begun forsaid Samuel, 
and that this is our firm agreement, and that we do bind ourselves, heirs, execu- 
tors, administrators, to the faithful performance hereof and to give each other a 
confirmation of lands and house according to law is testified by our hands. 

Witness 

Thomas Judd, Sam^l Hikcox, his X mark 

RiCHCHARD WeLTON, ThOMAS HICKKOX. 

Further: said Thomas is to finis h the chimblys that he has begun for said 
Samuel — also S acres that I, said Thomas, let said Samuel have by said Samuel's 
house, butting southwest on said Samuel's land which is on the same bargain above 
written, on the same obligation. 

Thomas hickcox. 
Witness 

RliHCHARD WeLTON. 



346 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Although Samuel Hikcox"s house is the first one mentioned at 
Judd's Meadows, it is quite clear that in 1696 a movement thither 
was in contemplation by a number of the young men. "Dec. 17, 
1696, there was granted to John Richason, John Bronson and Joseph 
Gaylord a parcel of land at Judd's Meadows, butting south on Dr. 
Porter's meadow, west on the river, and north on the rocks, pro- 
vided they build and coinhabit according to articles," and the same 
day the same young men, with John Hopkins, received " 14 acres of 
land lying eastward from Benjamin Jones's lot at Judd's Meadows, 
butting north on the hill, and to run south." In 1697 Abraham 
Andrews received his little acre-and-a-half lot the east side of the 
brook that ran into Benjamin Barnes's yard. In 1699 Benjamin 
Barnes was granted six acres at the west side of the spring, against 
his yard; Edmund Scott was to have a piece of land that lay 
between his eight-acre lot and his meadow, and Edmund with 
Joseph Gaylord, four acres above where Butler's house was, for a 
pasture, the four acres to be equally divided between them; Daniel 
Warner, ten acres on condition that he would build and remain 
five years in the town, which grant makes it not improbable 
that Hikcox and Warner were building their houses at the same 
time. 

There is an entry in 1704 which would make it appear that 
Hikcox and Warner were not the only inhabitants south of Squon- 
tuck brook in that year. This entry, together with the constantly 
increasing grants after 1700 (although no house is specifically 
mentioned in the records left to us), is certainly siiggestive of more 
than two resident families. The item is: "The proprietors gave 
Ji/dd's Meadow men leave to set up a pound for themselves on their 
own charge for impounding their own cattle, and such as are left 
out in the field when men are at work with them there." Had the 
"Judd's Meadow men" been but /7w, the permission would surely 
have mentioned Hikcox and Warner by name — as distinguished 
from the planters who merely went there to cultivate their fields. 
The same fate probably befell the first attempts at settlement 
in present Naugatuck, as elsewhere in the township. Daniel 
Warner's house is not mentioned until 1706, when he received "a 
piece of land south of his land his house stands on— to but on 
Samuel Hikcox's land south," but, in grants before that time, he 
had been given " two or three acres on the south side the brook 
where the old path went over the brook "—and "a piece on the hill 
at the north end that he had of John Warner extending north to 
the end of the hill at the hollow where his cart path goes up," and 
"seven acres between the brooks called Daniel Warner's brooks,' 



THE SETTLEMEN2 AT JUDB'S 3IEAD0WS. 347 

and six more joining to his own land — all of which, taken together, 
betoken a certain resident familiarity, and occur from two to four 
years before his house is mentioned. 

For five or six years, or from 1706 to 17 12, when Zachariah Bald- 
win from Milford appears, we obtain no intimations of a new inhab- 
itant — and yet — in 1709 when Mary Andrews, the wife of Daniel 
Warner died, it will be remembered that when the town sequestered 
the land on Pine hill for a burying yard, it was done with the consejit 
of the neighborhood. Two families, living perhaps a mile the one from 
the other, could not have constituted a neighborhood — even in 1709. 
In that year Samuel Hikcox " was granted the liberty of that stream 
called Daniel Warner's brook (or Squontuck) from the east side the 
going over the sd brook, and a place for conveniency of damming, 
so long as he shall maintain a fulling mill, and conveniency of land 
to pass and dry cloth." A pound— a burying yard— a fulling-mill, 
or the prospect of one, within the first seven years — and but two 
men, two women, and twelve children in Judd's Meadows for ten 
years ! The improbability of the statement is evident. It is clearly 
a case of insufficient record. The supposition, based upon the 
known condition of the vSamuel Hikcox house in 1704, is that his 
eighth child, Gideon, born Sept. 6, 1705, was the first English child 
born at Judd's Meadows. The most careful gleaning of Waterbury 
records has failed to give additional sign of inhabited occupancy 
during the ensuing eight years — Zachariah Baldwin's venture in 
171 1 excepted.* 

In June of 17 13 Samuel Hikcox was summoned from the scene 
of his activities by the dread disease that fell upon W^aterbury in 
that and the preceding year. His son Samuel — nineteen — died in 
July, and Daniel Warner in September, leaving two widows — one 
young man, Ebenezer Hikcox, not yet twenty-one — and twelve 
children — seven of the number being under seven years of age, as 
the inhabitants of present Naugatuck in 17 13. 

In the inventory of Samuel Hikcox's estate, his " house, home- 
stead and land adjoining" are valued at ^,^40, while his "fulling- 
mill " is estimated at forty shillings. Five parcels of meadow land 
are mentioned, one of twenty acres (the Deacon's meadow). The 
widow was given, in the distribution, the south end of the house 
next the brook. The north end was allotted to Ebenezer, who 
married the next year. To baby Silans (vSilence), born after her 
father's death, was given " half the Hand, a lot in Hancock's mcdo, 
part of a bogey medo north of Woodbery Lower rod," (now called 
the Clay hole), and, after her mother's decease, she was to have six 

* See page 281. 



.^g HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

plates, a brass mortar, a "becor" and a right in the Deacon's 
meadow. Mrs. Hikcox and her son Gideon continued to live on the 
place, and Gideon ultimately became the owner of the homestead, 
by purchasing- the rights of his brothers in it. It may be mentioned 
here, that conflicting statements, made elsewhere, in regard to this 
house place — as, that the house sold by John Hikcox to James 
Brown and used by him as an inn, was the Samuel Hikcox place, 
arose through the ambiguity of one conveyance and the want of 
another— also, that a mistake was made by Bronson in supposing 
that the brook which ran down by wSamuel Hikcox's house was 
the Fulling Mill brook, and, that the New Haven road referred 
to, was the later and more eastern road, often called "the Hop- 
kin's road." Dr. Bronson also has placed severcil early settlers at 
Judd's Meadows that I have been unable to find, doubtless through 
oversight. 

The widow of Daniel Warner married Isaac Castle and removed 
to Woodbury. vSamuel Warner, the eldest son living at the time of 
his father's decease — then fifteen years old — made his home in the 
house at a later date, and his eldest son, Daniel, seems to have been 
the first man born in Naugatuck who lost his life as a soldier in the 
service of England. He died at Cape Breton before 1745. 

Benjamin Richards was the third young man who tried to estab- 
lish himself at Judd's ]\Ieadows. He purchased meadow land next 
the "Deacon's meadow," and laid out his bachelor land on the 
Great hill up Toantic brook. He appears to have selected a build- 
ing site on the plateau at the southeast corner of the Great hill. 
In the description of his lands, mention is made of " Calkedes lot " 
— the reference intended being to the sale made by Conkapatana 
and Tom Indian, his son, of "a small piece of land" in 1711. 
Whatever progress young Richards may have made towards build- 
ing remains undiscovered, for his work was arrested by death 
in 1714. 

The fourth settler was Joseph Lewis, who made his residence in 
" Conkapatana's lot," south of Toantic or Butler's House brook and 
west of the river, in 17 14. His house was west of present Ward 
street, a little below its junction with the river road. In 17 14 also, 
John Barnes settled in the Hop Brook valley near the old stock 
yards in present Union City. It is said that a part of the frame of 
his house is still standing and in use. In the same year Obadiah 
vScott built a house at the extreme southern part of the township 
near Beacon Hill brook and on the old New Haven road near its 
junction with the turnpike. This house was about two miles below 
Naugatiick center. 



THE SETTLEMENT AT JUDB'S 3fEAD0WS. 340 

In 1 7 16 Thomas Richards was living at the same place. A 
cartway "led" between the two houses. In 1716 John Hikcox 
had a house on the New Haven road, south of the Samuel Hikcox 
house — Ebenezer Hikcox, his brother, also had a house north of 
the Samuel Hikcox house. Samuel Warner, son of Thomas laid 
out the land on which Butler's house stood and was livino- on it 
in 1718. There is a ledge near his house site often called Indian 
rock. He also laid out the first land in Millville center, where 
Abraham Warner and Daniel Williams afterward lived, and where 
Marshall Whitney now resides. In 17 18 also, Samuel Scott War- 
ner's brother-in-law — had a house by his side on Butler's House 
brook. 

In 17 17 Hezekiah Rew of Milford and James Brown of New 
Haven began the purchase of lands at Judd's Meadows, and before 
1722 were resident there. In 1722 came Samuel Chidester (a 
brother-in-law of Joseph Lewis) from Wallingford. 

In 1726 John Andrews went down and built a house at present 
Gunntown near a spring, not far from the well known brick store 
built by Samuel Gunn. He was the first permanent settler in that 
neighborhood. 

In 1728 Joseph Lewis, Jr., had a house in the Towantic meadow, 
below the site of the old Church in Gunntown. 

In 1729 Abraham Warner (youngest son of Daniel, deceased,) 
settled at present Millville. 

In 1730 Edmund Scott 3d, was living on Great, later Gunn hill, 
and Samuel Barnes had a house near his brother, John Barnes on 
Hop brook. In the same year John Johnson and Isaac Bronson 
were resident at the " South Farms " as the region was sometimes 
denominated. 

In 1732 John Weed was living in Towantic meadow, west of 
Gunntown. 

In 1733 Jonas Weed was on Twelve Mile hill, and Joseph Weed 
was on Straits mountain, near the top of the mountain. In the 
same year Job Pierson was on the same mountain. About 1735 
Thomas Porter left his large house, that stood until after 1840 on Bank 
street — the Waterbury National Bank building now occupying its 
site— and built a house on land at Judd's Meadows that had been 
given to his father by the town in 1686. The house that he built is, 
according to tradition, still standing and known, I believe, as the 
Whitney house. Tradition also claims that it was removed from 
its original site. It was an inn during the War of the Revolution 
and Thomas Porter, a grandson of the builder, was inn-keeper. 
The old house gives evidence of its age. James Baldwin— a brother- 



HItiTORT OF WATERBURY. 

in-law of Thomas Porter— he who culled the shingles for the meet- 
ing house, probably went down at the same time. 

'^Daniel Williams left present Oakville, and about 1735 he is found 
on Straits mountain. 

In 1739 John Lewis had a house southwestwardly of Joseph 

Lewis. 

In 1740 Thomas Matthews was living on or near the Woodbury 
line and near the southwest corner of the township. 

We have mentioned thirty-one persons resident in Judd's 
Meadow between 1704 and 1740. Of this number, during the 5-ears 
included between 1704 and 1740, Joseph Lewis was the richest man 
—in 1734 his taxable possessions being rated at ^206, but in 1739 
Stephen Hopkins won the race by a single pound. Twenty-three 
vears later, in 1762, Nathaniel Gunn surpassed Stephen Hopkins by 
three pounds. Therefore, the men mentioned were the three 
richest men in present Naugatuck down to the close of the Ameri- 
can Revolution. The other rich men were Thomas Porter, Thomas 
Richards, Gideon Hikcox, Samuel and John Lewis, Thomas 
Matthews, and James Brown. The above statements are based 
only on the taxable amounts, as given in the rate-book of the listers 
from 1730 to 1784. 

THE FULLING MILL SITE. 

The fulling mill of Samuel Hikcox at Judd's Meadow was prob- 
ably the outgrowth of an earlier mill on Great brook at Waterbury 
center. No positive -evidence of the existence of such an enter- 
prise has been found, but a portion of that brook, it will be remem- 
bered, was sequestered very early for that purpose, and it is not 
improbable that Samuel Hikcox himself carried on the business at 
the center before his removal. 

The outline history of that mill-site for a century is interesting, 
and may, perhaps, be given as an instance of what may be gleaned 
from old records. From 17 13 to 1730 we find nothing in relation to 
it. In 1730, Ebenezer Hikcox — the son who remained at the home- 
stead — laid out the land anew, which is described as being "at the 
place where his father set up the Fulling Mill." In 1733, a mill of 
some sort was on this land; whether it was the old mill of Samuel 
or a new creation of his son does not certainly appear. In 1733 
Ebenezer sold to Hezekiah Rew " the mill and the house over the 
mill." In 1735 Rew sold the mill, and apparently the house with 
it, to James Baldwin, who prospered in its possession for fifteen 
years, owning a grist mill and another mill. In 1750 or 1751 Bald- 
win sold his possessions, including a 200 acre farm, to May Way 



THE SETTLEMENT AT JUDD'8 MEADOWS. 



351 



and William Hoadly of Branford. May Way soon sold his half 
interest in mills and land to Richard Smith of Woodbury, who 
immediately appears to have " set np the frame of a house " on 
Thomas Porter's land, and before purchasing it. The house he 
built was south of Fulling Mill brook, between the river and the 
New Haven road, while the mill was north of the brook and east 
of the New Haven road — the Daniel Warner house being on the 
same side of the road, but south of the brook. 

Before Smith had finished his house, Jonathan Beebe of Lyme 
appeared on the scene and was so attracted by the advantages of 
Judd's Meadow for business that he made him a tempting offer 
which vSmith accepted and Beebe became a resident. During all 
these transitory scenes William Hoadly — known by his friends 
(tradition tells us) as "Black Bill" — remained the apparently satis- 
fied and unmoved owner of the undivided one-half of the 200 acre 
farm, including mills and dwelling house. Mr. Beebe doubtless 
brought Eastern ideas and notions from New London and Lyme 
into the valley, and Mr. Hoadly probably preferring the old wa3's, 
the two men agreed to divide their possessions. Consequently each 
became the owner of a strip here and a parcel there of good, bad 
and indifferent lands. Hoadly eventually became sole owner of 
the grist-mill and it is thought of the saw-mill also, Mr. Beebe 
retaining a right to lay logs by the mill, and possibly a right in the 
mills. When the lands were divided, as above shown, the old 
Daniel Warner homestead (called at the sale a small house) was 
also divided — the dividing line passing through the chimney. 
By the time Mr. Beebe had completed his new house and fence 
he conveyed all that he owned east of his new fence to Mr. 
Hoadly. 

In the course of time — Mr. Beebe having become, by the grace of 
The General Assembly, a Lieutenant, wrote: "Being advanced in 
years, and being called to the Wars," and made his will. 

Mr. Hoadly seems to have lived and died in the occupancy and 
possession of lands, mills, and houses. He built a new house for 
his own use, and gave the old one to his son William, who became 
successively the owner and occupier of the premises. The lono- 
holding of the Hoadlys gave to the locality a name that became a 
landmark for several generations. 

William and Jude Hoadly, being brothers and of one mind, 
remained in the ownership of the old " fulling mill region " on 
Squantuck brook— Jude living on the hill, south of the brook in 
a house built by Zera Beebe, and which house is standing at this 
date, (1891) — William remaining in the homestead of his father. 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

.■).i- 

Jude was noted for his in.q;enuity as a designer and worker in 
wood. He had a "shop" in that vicinity, if not on the brook, 
where he manufactured spinning wheels, and received (it is said) 
"a land grant about 1770 for services in the old French War." 
In process of time Jared Byington came upon the scene and it 
would seem, that having purchased lands from Hoadly, he " set 
xip" a mill to manufacture nails. Jude Hoadly and Jared Byington 
agreed to make a division of lands and other interests and also 
the very water rushing down from the hills. Hoadly was to use 
it two weeks and Bvington two weeks — alternating in its use. 



CHAPTER XXVIII. 

THE HOP BROOK SECTION EARLY SETTLERS ON THE ROAD TO MIDDLE- 
BURY LEMUEL NICHOLS' TAVERN A BRIDE's BROOR DR. JAMES 

PORTER EPHRAIM BISSELL WATERBURY's INDIAN RESERVATION 

NON-RESIDENT LAND OWNERS. 

HOP brook rises east of Lake Quassapaug at an elevation of 
750 feet above the sea, runs through Cedar swamp north- 
ward of the lake and wavers through about fifteen miles 
of territory, receiving at least fifteen tributaries in its course to the 
Naugatuck river at Union City. 

Mention must be made of the early settlers in this section of the 
township. The level land along the brook near Carrington's 
slaughter house was John Barnes' plain. On it Caleb Thompson 
built a house about 1733. After it was finished it was found that 
the records were so confused that all rights must be ignored and 
the land laid out anew. Poor Samuel Barnes was all the way 
through life the victim of mistakes in some form, notably in the 
line of his various land records. He sold the land to Thompson, 
but it had been so recorded to Barnes that it appeared to be on the 
wrong side of the brook, so that it became necessary to turn the 
brook around and the hill over, in order to make Thompson the 
owner of the land. John Barnes began anew and laid out the land. 
Samuel bought it from his brother and re-conveyed it to Thompson, 
as being easier than to turn the hill over and the brook around. At 
this time Samuel Barnes was living farther up the highway to 
]udd's meadows on the west side of the river against Piatt's mills, 
and shortly after 1733, he had to lay out his own lands anew — the 
records having been lost or the deeds unrecorded. Silas Johnson, 
another unfortunate individual, was living just above Samuel 
Barnes. John Johnson had been the first settler in that spot in 
1726, and Silas succeeded him. John had built his house on common 
land, so that Silas, after his father's death, was compelled to have 
the spot where his house stood laid out. 

On Hop brook, above Barnes' plain and in the vicinity of Brad- 
leyville, lay George Scott's eight-acre lot, under which name the 
locality was known for a generation. Near this lot there comes in 
from the east a branch called Welton's brook, named from John 
Welton's boggy meadow, which lay in the valley between Malmalick 
and Oronoke hills. Farther up Welton's brook lay a noted point, 



HISTORT OF WATERBURT. 

known as Scovill's boggy meadow, and sometimes as vScovill's and 
Gavlord's meadow. It is now called the Peat vSwamp. 

In going from Watcrbury to Middlebury the first ascent is upon 
West Side hill, first so named in a grant made to vSamuel Barnes 
between 1730 and 1733. Next, to the right, is Bryant's hill. Pass 
Tamarack swamp, and Richards' hill is at your right as you are pass- 
ino- through the swamp. Pass the Boughton place, and Arnold's 
hill lies to your left. Cross the Peat sw^amp, and at your right lies 
Gaylord's hill. Lemuel Nichols' tavern before the "Revolution," — 
now an old house — stands on this hill. A quarter of a mile further 
on, and Oronoke hill is on your left. The Umberfield place is on 
the north end of this hill. The John Hine place was in the vicinity. 
Cross Gaylord's brook, and to your right is Two-and-a-half-Mile 

hill the southern end of which hill is the rock known as Pine rock 

a boundary point between Watcrbury and Middlebury. The west- 
ern slope of the above hill is now known as Mount Fair. Between 
the Two-and-a-half-Mile hill, and the Three-Mile hill, you pass Bis- 
sell's hill at the left, which still bears that name. The old Morse 
road went over this hill, and on it were several houses, and later a 
blacksmith shop belonging to Joseph Peck. Three Mile hill was 
named, I know^ not how early, but it is mentioned in 1720. When 
you have reached Middlebury-Four-corners, you have passed the 
southern end of this hill. The village of Middlebury is upon the 
northern end of the ridge to wdiich the name of Bedlam was applied 
very early. Beyond Middlebury, and next Lake Quassapaug, lies 
the hill known in 1686 as the Great Hill east of Quassapaug. In the 
first formal layout of one of the early roads to Woodbury which 
passed over the summit of Three-Mile hill — at the boundary line 
mention is made of the Bride's brook. The language is "at the 
going down of Wolf Pit hill to the Brid's brook in Woodbury 
bounds." The brook in question was a branch of Hop brook, now 
in Middlebury. We find one or more Bride's brooks in Massa- 
chusetts, as well as in Connecticut, with various traditions attached. 
In our own case we may venture a suggestion, not only in relation 
to Brides' brooks in general, but to the one at the Watcrbury and 
Woodbury bound line. The bride for whom this brook was named 
was, we will say. Miss Sarah Gaylord, whom Thomas Judd, Jr., mar- 
ried in 1688. The Reverend Zachariah Walker, of Woodbury, w^as 
the officiating clergyman on that occasion, and special mention of 
the fact is recorded with the notice. As he could not legally per- 
form any of the rites of the church or any civil functions outside 
of his own parish, the parties in question must have presented 
themselves within Woodbury bounds. To have complied \vith the 



1 VA TEBB URY LA NDS HELD B Y NON-RESIDENT WNERS. 355 

law, the clergyman and the contracting parties must at least have 
met at this brook for the marriage ceremony. The various tradi- 
tions connected with Brides' brooks undoubtedly had their origin 
in this custom — practiced at a very early period when passing from 
place to place was attended with difficulties and dangers. Getting 
married was not easily accomplished in Waterbury at that period — 
in fact, it was impossible, for the want of a proper officer. Young 
Judd's father was two years later appointed Commissioner or jus- 
tice of the Peace. 

As the Woodbury road of 1720 has been mentioned here, it may 
be added that the ancient road to Woodbury is referred to as early 
as 1687. It ran over Richards' hill and north of vScovill's boggy 
meadow. The survey of 1720 abandoned that route and adopted 
what had been known for a time as the lower way, which ran over 
Arnold's hill and south of Scovill's meadow. The first mention of 
Hop swamp — naturally a region of hops — is in 1687, when George 
vScott received two grants of land there. Dr. Daniel and Richard 
Porter (brothers) were, perhaps, the first settlers to whom land was 
laid out at the swamp. Richard moved to New Haven and gave his 
Hop swamp allotments to his sons about 1726. The first actual 
settler there was either Ephraim Bissell, or Dr. James Porter. 

Dr. James Porter settled at Hop swamp, probably about 1725. 
The first mention of his house is found in 1730. It stood at the foot 
of the Bissell hill and west of the present Hop Swamp School-house. 
Tradition states that when his house was in building the workmen 
went from the center in the morning and returned at evening-, — 
fearing the Indians. In later years, a new house was so enclosed 
under the same roof with the old one that the two houses appeared 
as one building. When, a few years ago, the house was taken down, 
the workmen were greatly surprised to find that two independent 
frames were set together. So unique was the work, that a drawing 
of it was made for preservation. A new house built by the Bough- 
ton brothers occupies the very site of the house of 1730. 

Ephraim Bissell came from Tolland in 1728. He bought land at 
Hop swamp, and in a little swamp north of Hop swamp, which gave 
his name to the swamp, and also on the hill still known as Bissell's 
hill. The old house site lies at the foot of the hill near the north- 
eastern edge of the Hop swamp basin. The cellar walls still stand 
and the stones of the big chimney lie fallen in a prominent mound. 
A large butternut tree has grown out from the cellar bottom and 
apple trees stand about — decaying as they stand. The old well- 
place is still to be seen, and the large flowing spring where water 
was at hand before the well was made. It was here that a hundred 



.-(5 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

and fifty years ago young Ephraim Bissell bade farewell to home 
and family— never to return. July i, 1740, "being designed into 
the war in the Spanish West Indies in America," he made his will, 
leaving to his wife, Abigail, all his "moveable or Personal Estate 
of every kind Quality and species whatsoever and in all parts and 
places whatsoever the same shall or may be to her use forever." 
Besides numerous possessions in Tolland, Bissell owned 200 acres 
in Waterbury. His will was presented at the Probate Court in 
Wt)odbury in 1742 by Mrs. Bissell, who "informed that she had 
credible information that her husband died in the West Indies," 
but the estate was not settled until seven years had passed. Bissell 
is said to have been at the storming of Moro Castle, and to have 
been among the missing. He left two sons— Ephraim and Thomas. 
Ephraim died early; for some unknown reason he was placed under 
a master who managed his affairs and cared for his property and 
family. Thomas sold early his part of the land and removed to 
Derby, where he was living at the time of his last sale. His de- 
scendants are imknown. The last of the Bissells living on the hill 
was Eunice Webb. vShe lived in the old house on the top of the hill, 
and removed with her husband, Reuben Webb, to the "West." 
That portion of the Moss or Morse road that crossed Bissell hill, 
became the Webb road. Deacon Timothy Porter, the son of Richard, 
had a house at Hop swamp very early, which he is said to have sold, 
after which he removed to New Haven, or vStratford, or perhaps to 
both places. Later, in 1740, his house is mentioned in the layout 
of a road at Hop swamp. In the same year he sold out and went, 
perhaps, to Milford, but a few years later he had returned. The 
old cellar place of Deacon Timothy's house is still visible a little 
southwest of Hop Swamp school-house and a few rods from the 
highway, which formerly ran near the old house, but when changed 
left it in the field. His son, Mark Porter, built a house (or received 
the gift of one) quite near his father's house. Deacon Timothy 
Porter's house and that of his cousin, Dr. James Porter, were about 
a quarter of a mile apart. 

In 1729 the region about Bedlam meadows had attracted the 
favorable attention of men from neighboring towns. Eliphalet 
Bristol and Daniel Mallery of West Haven had laid out nearly a 
hundred acres at Bedlam meadow and on Bedlam hill; Samuel 
Umberfield of the same place, Mr. Samuel Whittlesey of Walling- 
ford and Briscoe also had lands on the same hill. 

Other early settlers may perhaps be mentioned here, without 
regard to date. John Porter, son of Timothy, settled on Bissell's 
hill; Timothy Porter, Jr., son of Deacon Timothy, on the same ridge, 



WA TERB UB Y LA NDS HELD B Y NON-RESLDENT WNEES. 3 5 7 

to the westward, near where Mr. Elliott now lives. Captain James 
Porter built a house west of the swamp— where Charles Boughton 
last lived. David Porter lived in the old house James built. 
Deacon Gideon Piatt built about one mile from Deacon Porter's 
house— Charles Nichols now lives at the place; his son Gideon 
built the house now standing- on the opposite side of the road, 
where L. C. Wilmot" lives. Benjamin Bement settled southwest 
of Hop swamp, between the houses of John and Timothy Porter, 
Jr. ; Gamaliel Fenn west or southwest of the swamp, toward 
Bedlam hill. 

It may be a surprise to our readers to lear.n that Waterbury had 
an Indian reservation. It was on the southeast portion of East 
mountain and consisted of fifty acres, and was bought by the pro- 
prietors of the undivided lands of New Haven, May 7, i73i,for "the 
use, benefit, and behoof of the Indians that now do or hereafter 
shall be properly belonging to or descending from that tribe of 
Indians called or known by the name of New Haven ©r Quinepiag 
Indians as long as any of that tribe or family shall remain and no 
longer." The Quinnipiac Indians were evidently moved on, for the 
consideration was a quit-claim by the proprietors of New Haven of 
"fifty acres at the upper end of the New Indian field, to John Moris 
of New Haven." This Indian reservation was undoubtedly occupied, 
for we find it called "the Indian farm" down to the time of the 
Revolution. 

Else Wooster, a daughter, perhaps, of the first John Welton of 
Waterbury, as he had a daughter Else, had land on the southeast 
corner of East mountain; and Stephen Welton, brother of Else 
Welton (whose marriage is not recorded in Waterbury), had land in 
the same vicinity. Else Wooster's land was the western bound of 
this Indian reservation. The above clue is the only link found con- 
necting Else Wooster with Waterbury. As many indications of 
relationships are hidden away in land records — in the way of sug- 
gestion to future genealogists, as well as for the interest of those 
concerned — certain land transactions connecting inhabitants of 
other towns with Waterbury for a single decade are introduced. 
They are not exhaustive of the records, neither are they chrono- 
logically arranged. 

In 1724 Josiah Rogers, a blacksmith, of Branford, bought of Ephraim Warner 
" a ^20 right in the commonage, and seven acres of third Division land to be pitched 
for and laid out to him," and Henry Toles of New Haven bought Samuel Barnes's 
£io right. In 1728 Richard Porter of New Haven, sixty acres at Meshadock 
meadow; Mr. Whittlesey of Wallingford obtained 2S2 acres; Deacon John Stanley 
of Farmington, 309 acres, afterward called Stanley's farm; Phineas Towner, 2^ 
acres west of the Little brook; Joseph Nichols of Derby buys of Thomas Porter and 
other heirs of Daniel Porter 10 acres on the Long Boggy meadow (in Watertown), 



358 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



and lands to be'taken up; Thomas Hopkins of Hartford, 92 acres on the east branch 
of Hancox brook, the north side of Taylor's Meditation; Bartlett's swamp is first 
mentioned — originally laid out to George Scott, Jr. ; the Rev. Samuel Hopkins of 
Springfield had land laid out in the Great "Hallow" in the Southeast quarter, 
near Wallingford; Daniel and Henry Toles laid out lands on Barnes's right; Mr. 
Samuel Hall of Wallingford received lands; Isaac Hotchkiss of New Haven began 
buying in the southeast part of the township, and William Gillitt (Gillet) of Milford 
sold to Freegift Coggeshall of Milford, 35 acres not laid but, originally granted to 
William Scott. 

In 1729 Jonathan Garnsey of Milford bought Stephen Hopkins's house with a 
highway on every side on Union Square — "four acres more or less," and nine on 
the Farmington road for /'250; Charles Lane, of Ripton, Fairfield county, a lot in 
the village; James Blakeslee sold the Irving Block corner to Abraham Utter of 
East Haven; Daniel Holbrook of Derby became a landholder; Abraham Hodges 
secured sixty acres to be laid out; Abraham Utter bought of John Bronson, Jr., his 
house and all his lands — 103 acres at Scott's mountain; Moses Bronson sold to 
Ebenezer Bronson a house at Bronson's meadow in Middlebury; " Tolles' Farm " 
became Joseph Nichols' farm, and James Johnson of Wallingford bought lands near 
it; Henry and Daniel Toles of New Haven sold to Joseph Osborn of the same place 
"one-half of all their lands and rights in land in Waterbury, obtained from their 
father, who bought said lands of Samuel Barnes and James Brown;" Abraham 
Hodges had removed to Waterbury and bought lands up the river; Daniel Hol- 
brook (blacksmith) bought lands, and Stephen Pierson of Derby bought of Holbrook 
90 acres, with a house, on Strait mountain near the Derby line, and Pierson's son 
Thomas, then in Woodbury, sold to his father 41 acres in Cotton Wool meadow; 
Robert Johnson of Stratford bought 20 acres west of Welton's brook, by John John- 
son's farm; Caleb Thompson built his first house near David's (vScott's) swamp; 
Deacon Stephen Hotchkiss of Wallingford took 50 acres in the undivided land, and 
laid out about one hundred acres next Wallingford; Nathaniel Peck of Walling- 
ford, farmer, with the consent of his wife Sarah, sold 64 acres at Tailor's meadow 
to Dr. Jeremiah Hulls of the same place; Thomas Lee of " Oosatonuck," province 
of Mass. Bay, sold land to Joseph Hurlburt; Samuel Umberfield of West Haven 
laid out 74 acres west of Cranberry pond; Eliphalet Bristol and Daniel Mallery 
possessed lands in "Bedlam" meadow; Mr. Timothy Johnson of Derby had 30 
acres in the undivided lands laid out to him; and William Lamson of Stratford 
began his ownership of lands by buying in present IMiddlebury 20 acres, which he 
added to from time to time for twenty-five years. 

In 1730 Mr. Southmayd and Samuel Hikcox sell to James Johnson 30 acres in 
"Ouze Bass swamp, east of Mad river and north of Farmington road;" Caleb 
Clark and Daniel How buy, for ^'220, 220 acres on the western side of Lothrop hill, 
westward from the Long Boggy meadow, and northwest from the Round meadow 
—in Watertown; Captain John Wells owns .85 acres at " Twich Grass Brook;" 
Joseph Gay lord, Jr., at B tick's Hill, where his diuelling house now stands, 
receives from Ephraim Warner three acres of land in exchange for Gaylord's land 
at Ash swamp; John Wetmore of Middletown sells to Nathan Hubbart (Hubbard) 
80 acres in Tailor's meadow; Joseph Harris buys near Round meadow; James Hull 
of New Haven, on the south end of the old Town Plot; " Samuel Hikcox Fulling 
Mill" is gone, for land is bought "a little above where it stood," and the Rev. 
Samuel Hopkins of Springfield sells land to Joseph Noyes. 

In 1 73 1 John Hurd of Stratford gave to his son Nathan Hurd 50 acres on the 
road to Wooster swamp, and a little later 50 acres to his son John; Joseph and 



WATERDUBY LANDS HELD BY NON-BESIDENT OWNEBS. 359 

Martha Smith sold to Noah Tuttle of Branford the home place of Mr. Henr}^ W. 
Scovill; James and Eunice Johnson conveyed to Mr. John Punderson the land and 
house where now stand the "Arcade" building and the buildings occupied by 
]\Iiller & Peck, and by T. F. Judson. The Irving block corner had a house and a 
" .smith shop " upon it, for Jan. 25, 1731, Joseph Harris sold it to Obadiah Scott, and 
March 25th, Obadiah sold it to James Blakeslee, having added the "smith .shop;" 
Mr. John Peck of Wallingford bought of George AVelton 75 acres "about two miles 
east from Judd's meadows— this was probably at the Ouinnipiac reservation; 
Stephen Kelsey bought the house and numerous lands of Thomas Andrews, and 
Andrews bought Kelsey's house next Woodbury line — at Middlebury, probably. 

In 1732 "Dr. Thomas Thompson, Phisstian," bought the big farm of over 300 
acres of Nathaniel Stanley of Farmington. Samuel Umberfield of West Haven 
sold a lot in the village; Benajah Stone of Wallingford secured land "up the 
River"; Noah Tuttle conveyed to Joseph Smith "oneMesuage and tenement of 
House Barn and three acres of home Lott" adjoining thereto— the Henry Scovill 
homestead; Timothy Stanley of Farmington sold to Isaac Curtice, " livuig at a 
place called North Haven," lands at and near Popple meadow; James Johnson lost 
thirty acres in Ouze Bass swamp by reason of an execution taken out against him 
by Thomas Marks of Middletown; Thomas White of Stratford bought of Johnson 
two tracts of land; Jcjhn Hurd, who declares himself a yeoman, sold to his son 
Ebenezer Hurd, "who is a Post-rider," 150 acres— a part of it south of the head of 
Roaring brook (a branch of Hancox), and the remainder at " Patuckahs " ring; 
William and Mary Parsons of Farmington resigned their rights in land to Samuel 
Hikcox; Mr. Jonathan Baldwin, Jr., of Mijford became the sole owner in "the 
Gristmill and Mill place and mill dam, lying east from the town," together with 
the thirty acres belonging to the mill, consisting of "fifteen acres on the Mill plain, 
eight acres over the Mad river by the common fence, two acres over against the 
mill, and one acre on this side of the river by the mill," and four acres up the river 
—this was obtained by virtue of ^350 money, and a deed from Stephen and Tim- 
othy Hopkins, executors of the will of John Hopkins, the miller. Baldwin bought 
the next month of Thomas and Rachel Upson a house and lot of three and a half 
acres on the south side of East INIain street. It was one of the two house lots at 
that time on that street between Exchange Place and the eastern street called 
the path to the mill— present Cole street. A portion of this land is still in the 
Baldwin family as represented by Mrs. Harriet Peck, Mrs. Catharine Smith and 
Miss Mary Cook. Stephen Pierson of Derby gave the life-use of 90 acres on Scott's 
hill to his son Job Pierson; Thomas Wooster of Derby secured 23 acres toward the 
southerly bound; Joseph and Martha Smith again sell the Henry Scovill place, this 
time to "Samuel Camp the third of that name of Milford," described as lying in 
the middle of the town near the meeting house— beside " the house and barn and 
orchards and gardens and trees and fruit trees "—Smith had added during his 
ownership a "Syder mill"; Jonathan Foot obtained an order for 30 acres in the 
undivided land; Ebenezer Baldwin of Woodbury bought land in Buck's meadow, 
just now prominently before the public, because of the action of the city of Water- 
bury in condemning land in it and on Buck's Meadow mountain for the laying of 
water-pipe lines from its reservoir, into which the waters of the West Branch and 
Moose Horn brook are to be received; Samuel Thompson of Farmington bought 
sixty acres in Watertown; Matthew Woodruff of Farmington land east of Judd's 
meadows "about a mile east from Samuel Warner's house"; Mr. James Prichard 
of Milford bought 70 acres with a house "west of the river, near David's swamp," of 
Caleb and Rebecca Thompson. 



360 



HISTORY OF WATEEBUBY. 



In 1733. Samuel Frost of Wallingford bought of Mr. Southmayd land to be laid 
out; Mr. Samuel Beecher of New Haven, a ^20 right in Waterbur\^ lands; Thomas 
Robinson and Joseph Tuttle. Jr., of New Haven, 60 acres on Scott's mountain and 
its vicinity; Mrs. Abigail Wright of Wethersfield, 40 acres against Judd's Jercho; 
Captain Theophilus Munson of New Haven, land lying in and about Cotton Wool 
meadow; Mr. James Prichard of Milford, for p^iio in money, of Stephen Upson, 
five acres with a house on it, "lying near the South meadow gate "—this was 
virtually the square bounded by Bank, Meadow, Grand and Field streets; Samuel 
and Dorothy Camp sold the Henry Scovill homestead— this time it was sold to an 
owner who would retain it— Lieut. Thomas Bronson; Dr. Ephraim Warner gave to 
his son Ebenezer 20 acres, half of his own dwelling house, and his "smith's shop, 
and the tools for smith work." all on Buck's Hill; Thomas Levensworth of Strat- 
ford for £-js obtained 75 acres adjoining John Johnson's farm, and on the hill on 
the east side of Welton's ileadow brook; Thomas White of Stratford sold to 
Joseph Peat of Stratford, two parcels of land— once James Johnson's; " Alexander 
Woolcot and Lydea Woolcot, Husband and Wife, which Lydea is the only daugh- 
ter and issue of Mr. Jeremiah Atwater, late of New Haven, deceased," conveyed 
to Abraham Utter, for /"250. numerous lands, including the Johnson house, and 
the hill on which Mr. Hiram Hayden's house stands— in this deed and other deeds 
called Welton s hill, from Ephraim Walton who built the first house on it; Thomas 
Brooks, merchant, of Boston, mortgaged to John Wass of Boston, " Distiller," more 
than 1500 acres of land in Waterbury and Farmington; Abraham Utter sold to 
Nathan Beard, the Johnson house and ten acres, and Welton's hill " of about four 
or five acres," bounded by Grove, Willow and Pine streets, with Samuel Scott's 
land on the east; Nathaniel Gunn of Derfey bought of John Andrews 157 acres with 
a house on it, northwardly of Twelve Mile hill; Abraham Andrews of Saybrook 
deeded to his brother Joseph Lewis, lands and rights in lands in the township; 
John Scott had a house at Meshadock. mentioned here, because not recognized 
elsewhere; and Ezekiell Welton, who is said to have gone to Nova Scotia, was 
living in Milford. 

In 1734 Isaac Bronson gave to his son Isaac the new house he had built, and the 
glass he had provided for it, and four acres of land on the south side of the Wood- 
bury road, in Middlebury; John and Nathaniel Griffin and Joshua Holcomb of 
Symsbury, grandsons of John Welton, the planter,, sold their rights of inheritance, 
to James Blakeslee, including 10 acres " westwardly of a hill commonly called 
Malmalick down southwardly upon the brook that runs through Scovill's and Gay- 
lord s boggy meadow"; Samuel Graves of Sunderland, "Hamsheir" county, in 
Massachusetts Bay, sold land "laid out to the hiers of Israel Richardson"; Joseph 
"Gearn.sey" of Milford bought lands at The Village; Joseph Mix of New Haven 
conveyed land which seems to have descended by inheritance from Sergt. Samuel 
Hikcox; Amos_ Camp of Wallingford expended £100 in land and habitation at 
Plymouth; John and Hannah Scott of Sunderland, Mass., conveyed land to Samuel 
Graves of Sunderland. This John Scott is a surprise ! He does not seem to be 
accounted for, except upon the remote possibility that he may have been the long 
lost son of Jonathan. This deed was signed in 1732, recorded in 1734. Joseph 
Guernsey of Milford sold a village lot to his brother; Thomas JNIarks sold " Oze- 
Bass" swamp to Nathan Hubbard; the village lots flitted from owner to owner 
like birds from twig to twig; the Rev. Samuel Hopkins was busied with his land 
sales and exchanges and the laying out of land; Samuel Hull of Derby bought 
land at a place called Bear plains, on the west side of the river at Derby bounds; 
Samuel Scott was living in Derby; Dr. Jeremiah Hulls bought lands freely; John 



WATERBURY LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS. 361 

Morris of New Haven sold his land to Joseph Guernsey of Alilford, as did many 
other land owners; Caleb Hendrick of Wallingford bought of Jacob Johnson for 
^100, So acres "about three miles east from the town, near Doctor Hull's land. 
This is a peculiar deed, in that it contains the following : "To have and to hold all 
that is therein, thereon, or any wayes thereunto appertaining, As mines, minerals, 
wood, Timber, stones, water. Water Courses, Turff and Twigg," suggesting mining 
operations on East mountain. Nathaniel Beadle, John and Eleazer Hurd of Strat- 
ford, and Joseph Harris of Ridgefield, own land in Waterbury; there was a Free 
Holders Court held at Richard Welton's house on Buck's Hill to determine to whom 
a seven-acre orchard, or seven acres with an orchard on it, belonged; Mrs. Susanna 
Munson of New Haven obtained a Village lot; Samuel Scott of Derby bought four 
acres on the northwest corner of Drum hill; Mr. James Bradley of North Haven 
secured the right to lay out 100 acres of school land for 999 years — making 3S5 acres 
of school lands sold in 1734; Ebenezer Hikcox sold out all his lands and rights of 
land in Watei-bury, except the acre on which his mill stood at Judd's meadows; 
John Humaston of New Haven bought 20 acres to be taken up in the undivided 
land; Thomas and Samuel Barnes sold their father's Town Plot house lot to Mr. 
Daniel Curtice of Stratford; Bantum Swamj^ and Great Pond in Litchfield are 
mentioned; in the sale of the Long Meadow .School lot it was bounded south 
"upon land that belongs to the heirs of old Giffer John Bronson." This name, 
applied to John Bronson, the planter, occurs a number of times in the records. 

In 1735 Thomas Matthews Jr. of Wallingford bought of Thomas Andrews a 
house and 69 acres of land, described as next Woodbury, and by the road that goes 
to Woodbury; Stephen Hopkins had a saw mill at Judd's meadow; Joseph Guern- 
sey. Jr. of Milford bought of Josiah Piatt of Milford land " at a place called the 
North Village." Mr. John How of Wallingford invested ^355 in a house and lands 
up the river; Deacon Samuel Brown became the owner of the Irving Block corner, 
and other lands; Captain William Judd began the purchase of his great farm two 
miles and a half out on the Woodbury road, by buying of Ebenezer Bronson three 
houses and numerous lands on Two-and-a-half-Mile and on Three-Mile hills — 
beside the little " two and-a-quarter rod" piece at Sandy Hollow that Ebenezer 
had bought for a Sabbath Day house of Joseph Smith, when Smith owned the 
Henry Scovill place; Benjamin Hikcox conveyed to Mary Hikcox and her son 
Thomas all his land rights; Benajah Stone sold land up the river; Nathaniel and 
Timothy Stanley, both of Farmington, sold to Martha Smith, wife of Thomas of 
that town, 100 acres off a larger tract that was conveyed to their father, Lieut. John 
Stanley; Samuel Woosfer and Else, his wife, of Derby, sold to Nathaniel Gunn 
land at Poland, originally laid out to Stephen Welton, deceased; Samuel Moss con- 
veyed his right in 400 acres lying betAveen the Spruce Swamp and the West Branch; 
Samuel Baker of Branford invested £\() in a Village lot, which he at once trans- 
ferred to Robert Foot of New Haven; a deed went upon record, whereby we learn 
that twenty proprietors of Waterbury united in 1725, in giving to Nathaniel 
Arnold 63 acres in the undivided lands, doubtless to induce so desirable a citizen to 
live in Waterbiiry; Daniel Tommus of West Haven began to buy lands; Basill 
Dixwell, formerly of Boston, but then resident in New Hayen — a silver-smith — 
conveyed to Captain Moses Mansfield of New Haven part of a ^50 right in the 
town, purchased by his grandfather, jNIr. John Prout; Mrs. Susanna Munson of 
New Haven bought a Village lot; John Morgan of Norwich bought 100 acres; 
Stephen and Isaac Hopkins, brothers, who had held their lands in common, agreed 
to divide them — both having dwelling houses in the eastern jDart of the town; 
Daniel Curtiss of Stratford bought a ^40 right in the township, originally Benjamin 



,.,, UISTOIiY OF WAIERBURT. 

Warner's; Nathan Tuttle bought land of Edward Scovill; Nathaniel Gunn 
augmented his possessions by paying to Joseph Lewis, Jr., ^390 in money for no 
acres and two houses; Eunice Welton of Durham conveyed land at Poland and at 
the Village; Ezekiel Welton of Milford Town obtained 7 acres at Isaac's meadow 
bars; James Smith of Haddam gave ^^226 money for four pieces of land northward 
of Scott's mountain; and Israel Richardson had removed to Sunderland, ]Mass. 

In 1736, the forty-year-old deed by which Isaac Bronson obtained the lands of 
Thomas Newell when he removed to Farmington in 1696, is placed upon record; 
Amos ]\Iatthews of Wallingford obtains 57 acres of Thomas Andrews' land; Hannah 
Tompkins of Woodbury, for £100, gets three village lots of 16 acres and 20 rods 
each, and parts of three other lots; Jonathan Baldwin buys of John Bronson the 
land lying in the point between the Mad river and the Naugatuck river — two acres 
in extent; Abigail Woodbridge of Hartford sells to John Warner land of her 
mother, Elizabeth Wilson (widely known for her ability as a financier); vSamuel 
Frost of Wallingford secures his first land in Waterbury ; there is paid out of the 
Waterbury town treasury fifty shillings in mone}^ to Elnathan Taylor for "a triangle 
piece of land containing half an acre and fifty-two rods "in present Thomaston 
" for a burying place for the inhabitants of the town of Waterbury, lying on the 
plain by Elnathan Taylor's house, a little north of it and north of Twitch Grass 
brook "; Samuel Baker of Branford buys for ^400 current money land in The Vil- 
lage; Abel Gunn of Derby buys of his brother Nathaniel the 30 acres at Judd's 
meadows, with two houses on it, which Nathaniel had bought of Joseph Lewis; 
Mary Tuttle of Woodbury has 50 acres laid out on her father Daniel Warner's 
right; John Rumrill buys a slice of Joseph Lathrop's 400 acres at the West Branch; 
Shadrach Seager of Wallingford buys 60 acres next south of Mr. Read's great 
farm, next Wallingford bounds; Lemuel Baker had worked for Joseph Lathrop 
three years and some months, and was to labor two months more for 100 acres of 
land lying near the West Branch; four Wells brothers, all of vStratford, give to their 
six sisters — four of them married — 200 acres in the northern part of the township; 
Joseph Prime of Woodbury sells to Sergeant Moses Johnson of that town 209 acres 
near Break Neck hill. 

In 1737 Mr. Benjamin Prichard of ^lilford bought of Obadiah Warner, for ^190 
in money, 50 acres at Buck's Hill, with a house and barn upon it; Mr. Samuel 
Baker of Branford, 60 acres at Scott's mountain; Richard Porter of New Haven 
sold to John Bronson his lands at Popple meadow; Mr. Josiah Terrill of ]\Iilford 
paid James Brown ^814 in money, for his possessions " at and about Judd's 
meadow on the east side of the river" — eight parcels in all, including his house; 
Daniel Tommus of West Haven had become Daniel Thomas of Waterbury, when 
he sold to Josiah Terrell 20 acres that he bought of his father Brown, at Judd's 
Meadow; James Poisson of Hartford quit claimed land to John Southmayd, Jr., 
made over to him by order of the General Court from the estate of Israel Richard- 
son, deceased; Mr. Benjamin Harrison of Branford bought in acres, with a house 
and barn upon it, of the land that the brothers, Stephen and Isaac Hopkins, had 
but lately divided, lying in the eastern part of the township; Mr. Samuel Todd of 
New Haven purchased 30 acres of division land, formerly belonging to Joseph 
Prime of Woodbury; John Alcock secured a ^^20 right in the sequestered and undi- 
vided lands; Mr. John Smith of East Haddam expended £i<^^ in Waterbury lands; 
Stephen Curtice and Zachariah Sanford of New Haven, ^^200; Mr. Samuel Cook of 
Wallingford, ^^200; Mrs. Abigail Tanner of New Haven, ;{;20o; Mr. John Hummes- 
ton of New Haven, ^425 in money, paid to Mr. Southmayd; Samuel Linsley of 
Branford, ^90; Nathan Beard, "Plough Right," secured land from a dozen own- 



WATEBBURY LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS. 363 

ers; Nathan and Mary Prindle sold to their brother, Nathaniel Arnold, the house 
and land on which they were living in April, 1737; and, in December of the same 
year, Arnold conveyed it to Ephraim Warner, Jr., and Ebenezer Judd— as "4 
acres with a house, shop. Fulling mill and tainters thereon, the press Iron 
plate and other materials for dressing of cloth, lying eastward fi-om the town 
by the highway to Buck's Hill;" Moses Tayler and James Pumroy of Hartford 
obtained of Robert Foot of Branford his portion of a Village lot, and bought 
another of John Scovill; ^Nloses Taylor and James Pumroy of Hartford bought the 
32d. lot in The Village, of John Scovill. In 1737 Abraham Utter had left Waterbury, 
for he is called "of the Oblong or Woster Sheer in Ditchers County, in the province 
of New York in America." In this year also, Isaac Trowbridge expended ^360, 
and Thomas Foot £,\<c>'}> in land; John Morris of New Haven bought 10 acres at the 
mouth of Hog Pound brook — that is, near the East Farms school house; James 
Wakelin of Stratford, land at Judd's Meadow; Jacob Blakeslee of New Haven, 100 
acres up the river; Nathan Tuttle, "living on the Oblong," sold his PopiDle meadow 
land; Israel Richardson "of Sunder Land," son of Israel, and grandson of 
Thomas, sold his father's Bachelor right to Capt. Timothy Hopkins; Samuel Sher- 
wood of New Milford, Joshua and Mary Judson, Abraham and Elizabeth Curtice, 
Gershom and Sarah Edwards, Thomas and Phebe Uffoot, and Samuel Sherwood of 
New Milford, sold rights in land. 

In 173S, Nathan and Hannah Gaylord of New Milford, and Samuel Sherwood of 
the same place, sell rights in lands; Mathew Blakslee of Wallingford receives the 
gift of land; Mr. John Smith of East Haddam removes to Waterbury to take pos- 
session of his lands, for which he has paid ;^5oS; the Rev. Mr. Todd owns 115 acres, 
about this time; William Ludington of New Haven buys land between Shum's 
orchard and the river (in the north part of the township); Joseph Lothrop writes 
himself "of Norwich; " Mrs. Elizabeth Lewis, wife of Jo.seph of Derby, buys eight 
parcels of land; Samuel Cowle Sen'' of Wallingford, John Morgan of Norwich, 
Shadrach Sagar and Daniel Clark of Wallingford, are land owners. Mr. Roger 
Prichard of Milford buys of John Warner a house and barn and 20 acres of land on 
Buck's Hill; David and Ruth Johnson (the youngest daughter of Joseph Gaylord, 
the planter), of Durham, convey all rights- in Waterbury lands to Benjamin Judd; 
Edmund Tompkins of Woodbury buys for ^170, in money, half of the grist mill at 
Oakville of James Williams, including a house and lands, and Samuel Root of 
Farmington, fifty acres on Three Mile hill. 

In 1739 Daniel and Lydea Paixly of New Haven sell 11 acres upon the side of 
Abrigado, given by Lydea's father, Richard Porter; James Waklee of Stratford 
buys a ^,'40 propriety; Josiah Piatt of Milford conveys land; Phebe Wooster, 
widow, of Derby, conveys a part of a propriety that was Benjamin Richards'; 
Elizabeth and Matthew Woodruff, both of Farmington, lay out lands; James Smith 
has a house north of Scott's Mountain and east of Obadiah's Meadow, where 
William Scovill had 20 acres laid out on the "Ministry Right;" James Bellamy 
becomes the owner of 86 rods of land; Mr. Alexander and Lydia Woolcot of New 
Haven, and Mr. John and Lydea Eliot of the same place, lay out lands— the first 
on a right derived from Timothy Hopkins, the latter from John Gaylord. Eliphalet 
Bristol and Daniel Mallery of New Haven sell rights derived from Ebenezer Bron- 
son's bachelor lot; Samuel and Sarah Weed of Derby sell land to Edmund Tomp- 
kins of Waterbury. John and Ruth Hill of East Guilford sold land; Gamaliel 
Turrell of New Milford bought 20 acres at Scovill's mountain lot, and 27 acres at 
Buck's Hill on the east side of Benjamin Warner's house lot, and laid out six parcels 
of land; Jeremiah Peck for "the consideration of value received" of Mr. Mark 



HISTORY OF WATEItBUBT. 

Leavenworth, conveyed to him 46 acres westward of Hop Swamp, and Mr. Leaven- 
worth records 151 acres; the heirs of Consider Hopkins of Hartford lay out lands; 
Daniel Potter was of Waterbury; Mrs. Susanna Munson, widow, of New Haven, 
buys 54 acres of school land. Moses Johnson of Woodbury acquired land; William 
Lampson of Stratford sold land to George Nichols, who began the record of his 
lands— as, "25 acres on the westerly part of Burnt hill, east of the head of the 
Little brook, on a popple swamp; " Ephraim Warner sold his half of the fulling 
mill, house, and shop, that he had bought from Nathaniel Arnold; John Morris of 
East Haven laid out land with Mr. Southmayd and his son John, east of the town, 
and north of the Farmington road. Ephraim Sanford and Obadiah Hill obtain cer- 
tain land rights from John and Samuel Stanley of Wallingford— that were derived 
through John and Thomas Newell and John Stanley; Daniel Clark takes land at 
David's swamp; Mr. Benjamin Harger of Derby buys of Daniel Hall of Derby, and 
Josiah Gilbert of Ridgefield, land south of Ash Swamp; Thomas Osborne buys no 
acres on Bedlam hill; Hackaliah and Elizabeth Thomas of New Haven, sell, in 
1733, to their brother Zadock Clark, Elizabeth's right in land— by a division of the 
estate of her mother, Mrs. Rebeckah Clark, late of New Haven; James Fenn 
becomes the owner of land on Bedlam hill; Samuel and Elizabeth Knowles of 
Woodbury sell to James Nichols land of John Bronson's original propriety, from 
their father Ebenezer Bronson's estate; Joseph Peet of Stratford sells to Thomas 
Leavenworth two tracts of land— ')ne on the Little brook, the other on Burnt hill; 
"Alice " Woster (formerly Else) sells her land at the southeast corner of East moun- 
tain to Samuel Burvvell of Milford; James Royce of Wallingford sells to his brother 
Phineas his right of inheritance in land up the river of their father Nehemiah 
Royce; Daniel Brackett of Wallingford buys land in Poland; Mr. Joseph Moss of 
Derby, 12 acres on the Twelve Mile hill, at the Twelve Mile stake, bought in 1721, 
and not before recorded— this is the 12 acres originally laid out to Stanley, and 
adjoined the loo-acre farm the Moss brothers bought of the Indian proprietors on 
that hill; Elisha and Abigail Kent of Fairfield also sell a right in the same 12 acres; 
Daniel, John, and Ebenezer " Bowton," Ehphalet and Mary Slason, David and 
Mary Waterbury, John and Eunice Fanshaw, all of Stamford, quit claimed their 
rights in land, derived through their mother, Mercy Bowton. 

In 1740 Lieut. Jeremiah Peck of Milford conveyed to the Rev. J\lark Leaven- 
worth land to be laid out; Mr. Samuel Hall of Wallingford and Joseph Daring of 
Litchfield each bought 20 acres to be laid out; Abram Canfield of Derby laid out 10 
acres on the southwest end of Malmelick hill; Zachariah Blackman of Stratford, 60 
acres near Grassy hill; Samuel and Daniel Lindly, heirs of Jonathan Lindly, all of 
Branford, over a hundred acres on both sides the Mad river; Josiah Rogers of 
Branford, land on Patucko's ring, while Josiah Rogers and Josiah Piatt of Milford, 
give, each of them, 10 acres "for the consideration of the First Society in Water- 
bury settling a minister, and to make over to their now present minister (^Ir. 
Leavenworth) as part of settlement; " Josiah Piatt in the same year gave in addi 
tion to Mr. Leavenworth 5 acres to lay out, assigning the former consideration as a 
motive, and a few proprietors contributed 60 acres for the same end; Walter Hen- 
derson of Hartford bought two Village lots; Joseph Hikcox, John and Hannah 
Camp of Durham, grandchildren of Joseph Gaylord, sold lands; Mr. Jonathan 
Smith of West Haven bought of Thomas Brooks of Boston 60 acres to lay out " on 
the Right that was originally Phillip Judds; " Thomas Clinton of Wallingford 
bought an ^80 right in the undivided lands; Jeremiah and Hannah O'Kean of 
Derby mortgage land a little south of Break Neck hill, which land was given to 
Hannah O'Kean " when she was called by the name of Hannah Hawkins, by her 



WATERS URY LANDS HELD BY NON-RESIDENT OWNERS. 365 

father, Joseph Hawkins; " Captain Benjamin Holt of Wallingford becomes a land 
owner; and the children of Thomas Judd, Jr., sell their rights in land to "our 
brother and sister Joseph Hall and Abigail, his wife, of Wallingford." Abigail is 
not mentioned among the children of Thomas, Jr. 

The above items represent l3ut a very small fraction of the real 
estate transactions enacted during- the period. Mr. Southmayd's 
duties were indeed arduous, and especially so during the year when 
he resigned his pastoral office, and in the year following, his weak- 
ness and inability are manifest in the public records. Oftentimes 
his strength failed in the midst of the recording of a deed, and 
another, and a very awkward hand, took up the work. 



CHAPTER XXIX. 

SAMUEL HOPKINS, D. D. JOHN SOUTHMAYD, JR. SABBATH DAY HOUSES 

BRIDGES THE "GREAT SICKNESS " OF 1749 JOHN ALLEN, A 

WORKER IN METALS INVENTORY OF HIS ESTATE TOWN INDEBT- 
EDNESS—EXPENSES FOR THE YEAR 1 749— WARDS OF THE TOWN- 
MR. SOUTHMAYD— HIS DEATH IN 1755— I'O^N OFFICERS IN 1760. 

^TOTWITHvSTANDINGthe preaching of Tennant and Whit- 
J field and Edwards, the standard of the relig-ion of the 
Puritans, held aloft through such stress of tribulation for 
SO many years, was gradually lowered. Nevertheless, here and 
there a rare, unsullied flower of Puritanism raised itself into life 
and beauty. Waterbury gave birth and nourishment to vSamuel 
Hopkins, a royal specimen of that peculiar flower and fruitage— 
which specimen, men of coming ages will seek to analyze with sci- 
entific interest, and, let us hope, with spiritual insight. It is at 
this time that we find him, a young man of twenty-two years, 
returning after his graduation from Yale College to his father's 
house in Waterbury — to live for some months the life of a recluse, 
spending whole days in fasting and prayer, seeking the promotion 
of that which to him appeared to be the true religion and spend- 
ing his time in promoting it among the young people in the town. 
Wherever we follow him, whether preaching a little later for a few 
Sabbaths in the Waterbury meeting-house in the presence of Mr. 
Southmayd, the teacher of divine truth to him from his infancy, or 
seeking to live under the light that fell from the life of Jonathan 
Edwards, or preaching to the people of Great Barrington; whether 
hurrying home in the hope of receiving his mother's last words, 
and tenderly confessing his great love for her; or again speeding 
over the same weary miles to find his father dying; whether spend- 
ing himself in the care and education of his three young brothers 
(all members of Yale College) left to his protection, or in efforts 
for the African and the Indian; whether creating a great system of 
theology, or performing the lowliest service to man, we find this 
grand Puritan an absolutely truthful man! Presently we hear him 
breathing forth to himself in the silence of his diary, words like 
these: "If all the highest enjoyments of earth were laid at- my 
feet, to have them to all eternity without God, I would not give 
this hour's enjoyment for them all. How swift and how sweetly 
do ideas pass the mind, \vhen it is in anv measure in a rio'ht frame. 



171,2- mo. 367 

And again: "O astonishing that I may say it! I have had a o-racioiis 
and most sweet visit from God. My soul adored and loved and 
rejoiced in him!" and again, "Have had a sweet time in a 
walk in the woods. Had more hope and confidence before God that 
I should dwell with him forever in his kingdom than I ever had 
before;" and once again, "I have been walking in a rope walk by 
myself. There I dedicated myself to Jesus Christ with strength of 
heart, with unspeakable joy." But we might go on indefinitelv 
repeating the scale of the heights and the depths of that man's 
magnificent nature — under Puritanism — without conveyino- a sin- 
gle note of its surpassing grace and sweetness. Would that some 
one of Waterbury's sons might honor himself by givino- to our 
" Meeting House Green " statues in memory of John vSouthmavd 
and Samuel Hopkins. 

The esteem in which John Southmayd, Jr. was held by his fel- 
low townsmen is well evinced by his election in December of 1742 
to the offices of selectman, constable, fence viewer, collector of the 
country rate and member of the school committee. Two months 
later he died, leaving a wife — to whom he had been married but 
three years— and two sons. Daniel Southmayd, his only brother and 
younger by seven years, was appointed to fill the vacant office of con- 
stable, and to gather the country rate, while Timothy Judd became 
townsman, and Lieut. John Scovill served on the school committee. 

In 1743 Wallingford was ambitious to have "Courts kept" a 
part of the time in that town, and invited Waterbury to join with 
her in a petition to that effect, which was agreed to on the part of 
Waterbury, provided that "no part of any expense of money in 
making the application, or building a court house or prison might 
fall upon her." In the same year liberty was granted "to set a 
school house where the old school house stood," but no word or 
hint has been afforded us as to the location of any school house up 
to this period, beyond the fact that when it was voted to build one 
in 1731, it was to be "twenty foot square and on the Meeting House 
Green," but a year from that day the above vote was cancelled and 
we hear no more of a school house until 1743. The probabilities seem 
to be that the first house was not on the green— that the second one 
was— and that the third one was placed where the first one had been. 
This was also the year when the town voted to apply to the General 
Assembly that the new bridge over the river at West Main street 
might "be made a toll bridge for all that should pass over it except 
the town inhabitants." 

Sabbath Day houses became prominent in 1743. The earliest 
one noticed was in 1731 when Joseph Smith, then owning the Henrv 



(38 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

Scovill homestead lot of three acres, sold from that portion of it 
called the vSandy hollow, a two rod square piece to Ebenezer Bron- 
son for a vSabbath Day house. The Dr. North residence stands in 
Sandy hollow. In 1737 James Porter, then living at Hop swamp, 
sold to his brother Thomas the homestead of their father Daniel— 
the taxable estimate of which land alone is to-day rated at over one 
million dollars— "except 20 foot square on the east side joining to 
the highway to build a small house upon." The third one we find 
when ^Stephen Hopkins— then living at Judd's Meadow— bought 
of the William Hikcox estate, Jan. 12, 1740, "a small Sabbath day 
House and twenty foot square of land on which it stands in the 
First Society near the Meeting House, bounded south on a high- 
way and every other side on Mr. Leavenworth's land." Forty-four 
years later Stephen Hopkins' son Joseph sold the above land to the 
Rev. Mark Leavenworth, then described as "lying at the south- 
east corner of his home lot." It may now be described as the south- 
east corner of the homestead land of the family of the late Charles 
B. Merriman. This Sabbath Day house had an eventful history in 
its later and more secular days. In 1743 William Silkriggs had 
liberty to set up a house " in the highway against the north end 
of Edmund Scott's house where the discourse was of setting the 
church." The land granted was to be twenty by twenty-two feet 
in dimensions. In the same year the town "upon the motion made 
by some persons for liberty to set up Sabbath Day houses in the 
highway, appointed a committee to state what place they should 
build on." Ebenezer Hikcox wished to place a house in the Ram 
pasture [Willow street south of West Main street], but was referred 
to the committee appointed to state places for the building of Sab- 
bath day Houses. He was probably an attendant of the church 
ne'ar by. A little later general permission was accorded " such 
farmers as had a mind to build Saboth day Houses, of setting them 
in the highway against the Sandy hollow above Thomas Bronson's. ' 
They were to advance into the highway sixteen feet, and extend 
along it twenty rods. 

In 1745 the town resolved "to apply to the General Assembly in 
May or some other time or way to get a settlement of the line 
between Farmington bounds and Waterbur3^" Mr. Southmayd, 
Captain Samuel Hikcox, and Sergeant Thomas Porter were empow- 
ered with authority to settle the matter. The bridge over the 
Great river on the Woodbury road was a source of continual 
anxiety, trouble and cost. It was built and repaired and rebuilt 
vv^ith surprising frequency. In 1748 it was again swept away. 
Eighty pounds was appropriated to the building of a new one. 



1743-1760. 369 

" taking- the timber and plank left of the old bridge." At the same 
time ^22 was appropriated for the Northbury bridge, ^22 " for 
the bridge over the Mad river, a little below the mill," and /;22 to 
Captain Samuel Hikcox toward a good cart bridge over the river at 
his mill. Even the highways in present Watertown were "spoiled 
by the flood " in that year. Nothing is found in relation to a bridge 
at Judd's Meadow until 1753, when the inhabitants living there 
petitioned for some relief about building- a bridge. The town sent 
a committee "to view the circumstances and judge of the necessity 
of having- a bridge and how the inhabitants there were affected to 
it." Captain Daniel Southmayd was on this committee. The 
report of the committee was acted upon by granting- "Judd's 
Meadow men leave to draw ^100 old tenor, towards the building a 
bridge over the river at the mouth of Toantic [or Long Meadow] 
brook where it empties itself into the river," but the grant was con- 
ditional,— Samuel Scott, Gideon Hikcox, and John and Samuel 
Lewis v/ere required to give sufficient bonds that there should be 
no further demands on the town for building or repairing a brido-e 
in that place. In a " Bridge account at Judd's Meadow " which has 
been preserved without date, but somewhat later, at the raising of 
the bridge eighty "meals of victuals" were furnished at six pence 
each. Among the items of cost are included two gallons of rum 
at four shillings per gallon, and "five gallons of Rhum of Capt. 
Ezra Bronson, allowed for the Watermen." The charge for a 
day's work on this bridge varied from two to three shillings, 
but in most instances the town reduced the amount by a six 
pence, if over two shillings. In 1749 the townsmen were ordered 
to take bonds of Ebenezer Richardson, Isaac Bronson, Jr., and 
Stephen Welton for the Woodbury Road bridge. That was a 
King's highway, or country road, and it was necessary to keep 
it open. 

Mr. James Blake of Dorchester, left an account of the severe 
drought that prevailed in the summer of 1749, in which he tells us 
that it was the 6th of July before any rain came; that by the end 
of May the grass was burned up and the ground was white; that 
the cattle were "poor, lowing things" wandering in search of food, 
and nothing green to be seen. There was so little hay that one 
hundred pounds of English hay sold for three pounds, ten shillings; 
barley and oats were so pinched that only seed was obtained; Indian 
corn rolled up and wilted, and flax failed— that the next spring, 
butter sold for seven shillings and six pence the pound, and that 
June iSth, 1750, was said to be the hottest day ever known in the 
northerh^ part of America. 



^^o HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

The history of the summer of 1749 in Waterbury is best told in 
the brief and terse words of a petition of the inhabitants, addressed 
to the General Assembly of the Colony, in October of that year, in 
which they say: In the summer past, by the Providence of Almighty 
God we have been visited with Remarkable and Sore Sickness, 
which spread itself throughout the whole Town in so extraordinary 
a manner that in two Parishes scarcely ten families escaped the dis- 
temper. Many whole families at the sai/ic time were incapable of helping 
themselves in the least degree. It happened at a time when our Hus- 
bandry required our utmost diligence and labor, and very much 
distressed us on that account. From the middle of Harvest to the 
last of September, almost all that were in health were constantly 
employed in tending and watching with the vSick, or burying the 
Dead. Without the charges commonly arising in like cases on 
account of Physicians, Tenders, and loss of time, which are doubt- 
less very great in such a Distressing time, these are not comparable 
with what we have suffered by neglecting our husbandry in the 
proper season for improving the same. Almost all our Low Meadows 
dried as they stood, so that what of them were mowed were of little 
or no value and some not mowed yet. Not above half the usual 
number of Acres of English Grain were sowed, and that so much 
out of season and so poorly Tilled that we have reason to expect 
but a thin harvest in proportion to what we have sowed, so that if 
it shot;ld please God to favor us with health in the ensuing year, 
our Distresses will be great — our Provision to be purchased for our 
Families and our Town and vSociety charges greatly increased on 
many accounts. 

They besought the abatement of the Country tax upon the list 
of 1748. The tax in question was forgiven the people, but the town 
received no school money for that year. 

Of the disease which caused such sore distress and affliction. 
Dr. Bronson tells us that it took the form of a low, nervous fever, 
and that if a patient survived the ninth day, recovery was expected. 
We have a list of ninety-three deaths which occurred during the 
year 1749. According to Dr. Bronson's estimate of the population 
in that year — 1500 — the mortality must have been equal to one-six- 
teenth of the inhabitants. He also states that " six graves were 
open in the old burying ground at the same time." These graves 
were probably made for Rachel Johnson, an infant, Susanna 
Williams, daughter of Daniel, aged seventeen years, a three year 
old son of Obadiah Richards, an infant son of Thomas Hikcox, 
Mary, the three year old daughter of Samuel Hickox, and Osee, 
the three year old son of Isaac Hopkins, as the first named three 



174^-1760. 371 

died on the 24th of Aug-ust, and the second three on two sneceeding 
days. Three deaths also occurred on August nth. John Barnes, 
the shoe-maker, lost four children. Thomas Williams died, and 
three of his children. The vScott family lost six of its members, 
and the Prichard family seven. The very poor, the utterly desolate, 
the solitary, the homeless individuals disappeared from record, and 
left no sign. Their numbers we cannot give. John AUyn, or 
Allen,' had "no near relative," and but for the Probate Records at 
Woodbury, his very existence as the first known worker in brass 
and other metals in Waterbury, would have remained unknown. 
The "estate of John Allen" was presented on October 31st, 1749. 
" No near relatives, and John Alcox, represented as a man faithful, 
was appointed administrator." The inventory consisted of more 
than one hundred and fifty items, of which the first mentioned is a 
Bible, appraised at ^2, followed by a Psalm, a Hymn, and a spelling 
book. He had a ^£2 10 shilling gray wigg, a new ^6 castor hat, 
leather, brown Holland, and plush breeches, beside check trousers; a 
-£io camblct coat, a ^10 grate coate, and a ;^7 blue streight body, 
brown russet vests, blew vest with silver buttons, and, best of all, a 
costly green vest; neck cloths of muslin and of silk, red checked and 
brown; stocks of cambric and muslin, both checked and plain; hand- 
kerchiefs of silk, linen and cotton; woolen, linen, new Holland and 
old Holland shirts; caps and mittens; old, and Blew linen, brown, 
and Blew worsted stockings; red flowered and yellow plate ribbons, 
and a paper of piniis, beside two snuff boxes, knives, combs, a razor, 
brass ink horn and numerous other articles. But what should 
interest Waterbury especially is the fact that he was apparently 
a silversmith and worker in brass. We quote from the inventory. 

£ s. d. 

Cash, . . . . . 21 07 00 I pound of steel, 

4 pair of knee buckles, . 2 00 00 6 ounces of copper, 
3 pair of shoe buckles, . 2 16 00 5 pounds 6 ounces old iron, 
2 pair of cast buckles, 00 17 00 Wire, ..... 
Pair silver knee buckles and A hand vice, . 

stock buckles, . . 3 05 00 A screw plate and taps [?] 

Sale knee buckles, . 00 03 00 2 small screw plates, 

Glass buttons set in silver, 00 oS 00 A wier plate, 

Pair of brass buttons, . 00 04 06 Pair of small Dividers, 

Knee buckles, . . . 00 03 00 Pair of large Dividers, 

30 pounds and 4 ounces of A pair of scales, 

brass, . . . 12 02 00 Old files, .... 

2 pounds 6 ounces cast brass, 01 00 00 A brass box, . 

5 pounds of lead, . . 00 15 00 

Beside the above, there are knives, a chest, boxes, a leather apron, 
a ^iz piece of red broad cloth, thread, and silk, and remnants of 



£ 


s. 


d. 


00 


05 


06 


00 


03 


09 


00 


II 


00 


(JO 


10 


00 


1 


05 


00 


I 


05 


00 


00 


03 


00 


00 


03 


00 


00 


06 


00 


00 


04 


GO 


GO 


15 


00 


00 


12 


00 


00 


05 


00 



.-, IIIsrOEY OF WATERBUUY. 

dry goods, vials, and more snnff boxes. June ii, 1752, an addi- 
tional inventory was presented, containing wooden flasks, a pair of 
spring tongs, a brass skillet, sodering iron, an iron spindle, points 
of comb teeth, tongs for bnckles, copper, a pair of flukes, six pairs 
of boxes for great wheels, Juels without any drops; chisels, thread 
stockings, and other things, from alspice to seventy bushels of coal, 
the latter appraised at ^2 02 06. 

Poor John Allen! no near relatives! died, it miist be remem- 
bered, in 1749. His entire estate appears to have been dissolved in 
taking care of him in his last illness. It is stated that the adminis- 
trator brought in an account of debts due from the estate, which 
amount is ^173 07 07. "There remains ^8 02 11 which the court 
allows to the administrator in fiill for his trouble and charge and 
discharged him June 15th, 1752" — just fotir days after the second 
or additional inventory was returned. No list of debts against the 
estate is on file at Woodbury. 

The above view of the case is more than suggested by original 
documents that have fallen into our hands of other cases. We give 
a single one, showing that however kind and neighborly and chari- 
table the inhabitants of Waterbury may have been to their own, 
they expected full reward for whatever care was bestowed iipon 
the stranger within their gates. The case selected is that of Lydia 
Cosset. It is entitled: 

An account of and Bill of cost of what the Selectmen of Water- 
bury have done for Lydia Cosset, daughter of Ranney Cosset, of 
Symsbury, from the fifth day of Januar}^, A. D., 1749-50, in her sick- 
ness in Waterbury, which is as follows:" (The bill was presented 
to Ranny Cosset. Captain Samuel Hikcox presented his bill to 
the Town of Waterbury six days after the last charge in the ac- 
count against Lydia. It is for "his time and money spent in Riding 
to Simsburey upon Lidey Cosit Bisnes, three days." In his account 
of expense items for the trip, we infer that he stopped once at 
"Barnes's," twice at "Owens," twice at " Leweses," once at 
"Phelpes," and once at three several places, whose owner's names 
are not deciphered). The following is the bill: 

I the wife of Nathaniel Meril four da3^s, 

2. the wife of Roger Pritchard five daj'S 

3. the wife of Thomas Barnes eight days, ... 

4. the widow Prichard one day, 

5. the wife of Robert Johnson one day 

6. the wife of Benjamin Judd one day, .... 

7. the wife of Ebenezer Bronson one day, 
S. Philas the negro of Mr. John Southmayd one day, 
9. the daughter of Docf Porter one dav. 



£ 


s 


d 


2 


8 


00 


3 





00 


4 





00 





7 


00 





10 


00 





10 


GO 





10 


00 





10 


00 





10 


00 



1743-1760. 



373 



Rachel Baldwin one day, .... 

the wife of Benjamin Prichard one day and half, 
to Ensign Fulford for eight bushels of coal,* 
the widow Hickcox two days, .... 
Isaac Nichols three days tendenc, . 
to the wife of Ebenezer Bronson one day more, 



£ 


S 


d 


o 


lO 


00 


o 


15 


00 


I 


04 


00 


I 


00 


00 


2 


10 


00 


O 


10 


GO 


3 


19 


09 


8 


09 


09 


8 


01 


GO 


6 


00 


GO 


2 


00 


00 



IG g6 



IG. 
II. 

13- 
14- 
^5- 
17- 

18. to Docf Levenwurth for medisens, 

19. to Docf Ephrem Warner for Doctring her, 

20. to Docf Benjamin Judd for doctring her, 

21. to Docf Judd for one month bord and tendence, 
to the old Docf Warner for doctring her, 

Total, 47 

Item George Nicols bill from the fifth of January In Sd year In her 
sikness to the 9th day of Fubrey — as follows: 

1. by 2)4 pounds of Shauger at 6 a pound, .... 

2. by five gallons of Rhum, 

3. by an ounce of treahel water camphor 

4. by 12 pound of candels 3-6 pr pond, ..... 

5. by damiag lo futher Bed, 

6. by keeping her and watchers and nurses, .... 

7. wood and house room 4 weeks 4 pound, .... 
t. per week, 

to Keeping the old Doctor one night — and hors, 
9. to Sarah Barns 2 weeks more to nurse Said Lyde, 

10. and keeping Lydie and — by us, ..... 

11. to three pints of Rhume more the last fortnight, 

92 13 g6 

12. two weeks and candels and hous room, . . . . 2 10 00 

Note here — this bill of Corst is from the 5th of January until the iSth of Instant 
March. 

Thomas Bronson, \ 

Samuel Hickcox, y Selectmen of IVaierlmry. 

John Scovill, ; 

Among- the bills allowed for the same year, are one to Edward 
Scovill, "for keeping Chilson's child;" to Samuel Scott, "for keep- 
ing Mary Arbs;" to James Blakeslee, "for making Widow Camp's 
coffin, and one for John Welton's child;" to Thomas Porter, "for 
curing Stephen Camp's arm, and for riding- to Sergt. Warner's to 
prize sheep;" to "Reuben Blackeslee of Captain," Abigail Howe, 
Thankful Francher, Mary Church, Mary Cobin and Hannah Hull — 
all for the care of Widow Camp ; to John Scovill, " for holding 
three vandues with the Widow Camp's goods, and one day's ten- 
dance of Mr. Camp's;" to Jacob Blackslee, "for summonsing and 



o 


15 


GO 


II 


00 


GO 


00 


IG 


GO 


2 


G2 


OG 


6 


00 


GO 


16 


GO 


OG 


2 


10 


00 


3 


OG 


GO 


45 


03 


GO 


47 


10 


g6 



' It will be noticed that in John Allen's inventory, 70 bushels of coal were valued at only a little over £■2. 



... HI8T0BY OF WATEBBUIiY. 

3/4 

bringing- persons to tend the sick, three days;" to Doctor Ephraim 
Warner, "for Mary Arbs' child, and for Mr. Camp." 

" Enezer " Welton was another person afflicted with illness. 
Joseph Lewis, Jr., (who fell a victim to the same disease) spent a 
day in riding after the Doctor for him, and cared for him in person 
for two days. John Weed, Abraham Warner, the widow Sarah 
Warner, Mehetable Rew, John Lewis, Samuel Lewis and even 
the good Deacon Joseph Lewis himself (also a victim) attended 
"Enezer" one or more days, while John Lewis spent a day, as his 
brother Joseph had, in riding after the doctor for him; Ebenezer 
Richardson is credited in the same year "for a Journey of his Wives 
Horse to Stratford" (doubtless for medicines). Soon after this 
time Chilson's child begins its wanderings from family to family. 
Deacon Thomas Bronson lends the town his man and horse to 
transport a woman to Farmington, while his son Thomas mends 
Phebe Warner's shoes and sends in a bill " for keeping her 40 
weeks "at 12 shillings a week. It must not be inferred that Phebe 
Warner is a pauper, because she is a " town charge." The two con- 
ditions are often confounded, the one with the other. Phebe 
Warner — a young girl of fifteen years — bereft of her mothei"* by 
death in 1747; of her father and a brother in 1749, and of her only 
brother in the next year, became a ward of the town. With a "dis- 
ordered mind," and an inheritance in lands appraised at ^200, we 
follow her in her wanderings from Samuel Hikcox's house to 
Joseph Bronson's; from John Judd's to Thomas Bronson's. We 
find her spending five weeks in the late Charles D. Kingsbury 
house — then newly built by Andrew Bronson — transferred to Cap- 
tain Upson's for three weeks, and passed on to the house of his son 
Stephen for the next three weeks, while Daniel Southmayd makes 
a " gownd " for her, and obtains liberty from the General Assembly 
to sell her lands, which sale David Scott achieves in 1752. "A con- 
siderable number of persons became "for one reason or another 
wards of the town, as an outcome of the "great sickness" of 1749. 
Joseph Lewis, a grandson of Deacon Joseph Lewis, is of that num- 
ber. Let us look for a moment at the circumstances surrounding 
this unfortunate youth. About 1748 Joseph Lewis, his father, 
bought a house and a goodly number of acres on Twelve Mile hill. 
The house was described as " near the twelve mile stake," so 
often referred to. Bereft of his mother at the age of two 
years, of his father at thirteen, and his grandfather Lewis a few 
days later, the boy was left in the house — that many of us well re- 
member as standing, in its age, on Andrews' hill, summer winds 
moaning through its open doors and shaking clapboards — to con- 
front the desolate outlook of that cruel time, with only a child's 



1742-17G0. 375 

knowledge of life to lead him. Tradition tells the story that 
Joseph went through a corn field and plucked the ears and made a 
tire on the Sabbath day and roasted and ate the corn — that he was 
publicly whipped for his crime, and that the whipping destroyed 
his reason. Dr. Bronson tells us that Joseph Lewis was a town 
pauper, and was tried before Thomas Clark, Esq., May 12, 1756, on 
complaint of Oliver Terrell, for stealing forty shillings, proclama- 
tion money, and condemned to pay six pounds, proclamation 
money, with costs of suit, and also a fine of ten shillings, lawful 
money, to the town treasurer, and be whipped on ye naked body 
ten stripes — costs taxed at £,1 3 3." That "he was whipped accord- 
ing to the judgment of the court, a/id bound out to the plaintiffs as a 
servant, till the above sum should be paid." Joseph Lewis was 
eighteen years of age at the time of this trial. That he was of 
unsound mind, whether by reason of his early sorrows or of his 
punishment, seems only too evident from the fact that he never 
gained control of his property, his name not appearing on the tax 
list, and that as late as 1779 the town sold land belonging to him 
for ;^4oo. Still later, we find his guardian, the town, buying for 
him a pair of shoes, and getting another pair mended. Neverthe- 
less, he served his country as a soldier in the Revolutionary War. 

In connection with the above incident relating to Joseph Lewis 
Dr. Bronson gives the following estimate of our Puritan ancestors 
which we cannot forbear to quote: 

Individually, our Puritan ancestors were very much such men as we are — little 
better, no worse. There were among them men eminent for virtue, knowledge 
and patriotism ; while there was about the ordinary proportion, found in the 
farming communities, of the worthless and the vile. A very slight inspection of 
the records of the criminal courts will dissipate the dreams of those who contend 
that our great grandsires were perfect beings. They were bred in a rigorous age, 
and were exposed to peculiar hardships, dangers and temptations. These gave 
origin to peculiar moral characteristics — to virtues and to vices which were a little 
different from those of other ages and communities. But, on the whole, they, like 
us, were average men. We have more science, a more widely diffused literature; 
better roads, and bulkier ships, but our men are like their men— shoots from the 
same stock. Undistinguishing eulogy cannot properly be applied to any of the 
generations of New England; nor will truth justify indiscriminate censure. Saints 
and sinners, wise men and foolish, have been, and will continue to be found, in fair 
proportion, among all. We do rightly in judging leniently of the weaknesses and 
mistakes and even the guilt of our fathers. We make allowances for their circum- 
stances, the state of their civilization, the age in which they lived, the modes of 
thinking which prevailed at the time, their education, even their temptations and 
their prejudices, and the entire group of influences which contributed to mould 
opinions. 

The above estimate of the men of New England, if applied to 
the period subsequent to 1740, seems eminently fair. The "Great 



376 



mSTORY OF WATERBUBY. 



Awakening" was unto sin, as well as unto righteousness. Puritan 
New England became thereafter a thing of the past. Its real gold 
had become an alloy, still bearing the name and applied to the 
ancient usages, but dimmed and imperfect in many ways. The 
good men were here, but the "good old time" had vanished. 

It is interesting to note that after two generations many of the 
old names are still at the helm in towm affairs. Year after year 
Mr. vSouthmayd is chosen town clerk, and proprietor's clerk. It is 
his hand that pens the long deeds, and records them; that writes 
the indentures; that prepares many of the tax lists; that records 
scores of highway lay-outs; and carefully preserves the minutest 
minutes of every town and proprietor's meeting. We have a little 
book of two sheets about eight by eight inches, once folded, and 
carefully sewed, in which his hand recorded the town's debts and 
credits for the year 1748. Happy Waterbury of the long ago! The 
following is the list: 

Town Debts for tlie year 1748: 

I s. d. 

Ebenezer Bronson, . . 2 166 C. Tho. Blaaksle, 

C. Will Judd, . . I 00 6 Jonathan Prindle, 

Abel Camp. . . . 13 12 4 Abel Curtice, 

John Judd, . . . 04 14 o Cap. Tho. Hickcox, . 

Widow Hannah Bronson, . 00 17 7 Jno. Southmayd, 

Ambros Hickcox, . . 00 15 2 Jno. Scovill, 

George Welton, . . 2 04 4 Abel Sutliff, . 

20 lb granted to Northbury to build the bridge. 

Debts allowed 174S: 

/ s. d. 

C Sam" Hickcox, . . 05 00 o Cap. Stephen Upson, 

Dan'i Southmayd, . 2150 D. Thomas Clark, 

Abraham Truck, . . 00 15 o Richard Nichols, 

Obadiah Richards, . 00 18 o Jn". Southmayd, 

Account of Debts Due to the Town as they stand December, 1748, on Notes 

£ s. d. 

Gideon Allyn, . . . 13 15 2 Will Ludington, . 

Silas Johnson, . . 00 10 o John Rew, . 

Samuel Warner, . . 02 10 o Jonathan Scott, 

Timothy Porter, . . 05 00 o Jonathan Cook, . 

Caleb Thompson, . . 2 10 o Ebenezer Wakelee, 

Ebenezer Warner, . 2 10 o James Nichols, . 

Benj. Arnold 50 00 o 

Debts to the Town Due for Creatures Sold, Charges Deducted: 
£ s. d. 
Deacon Blackslee, . . 8 00 o Gamaliel Terrill, . 
Thomas Barns, . . 5 00 o John Sutliff, Jr., 

Gideon Hikcox, . . . 14 00 o Ebenezer Richards, 



£ 


s. 


d. 


00 


19 


10 


01 


II 


5 


00 


12 


4 


01 


II 


00 


3 


12 


10 


6 


00 


04 


01 


10 


00 


£ 


S. 


d. 


00 


12 





00 


06 





00 


12 





01 


18 


6 


Notes: 




£ 


S. 


d. 


00 


10 





04 


15 





00 


10 





00 


10 





06 


12 


3 


04 


iS 


6 


£ 


s. 


d. 


9 


00 





12 


10 






174^-1700. 



377 



In 1745 the town indebtedness was still less. In 1749 it was 
greatly augmented. Many autograph bills, in which the town is 
the debtor, still remain. The approved bills are duly signed by the 
selectmen. 

Of the number is one, whereby the " Town of Waterbury is 
Indebted to the Perambulators of Farmington Line, for a Quart of 
Rhum 00-12-6 and their expences at Cainebridge ^i-to-9. And to the 
Drumer for 2 Days in Ocf, 1747, ;,^i-oi-o." Other bills are — one of 
Capt. Samuel Hickcox " for his journey to Stratford," and Ensign 
Fulford one "for a journey to Stratford "; to " Capt. Upson for carry- 
ing Mr. Camp to Dc" Lewis's o-ioo"; to Thomas Bronson, Jr., in 
1747, '' 16 shillings for 8 meals to the listers "; to "Jane Baldwin, for 
sundry articles for cloathing for Mary Earls, for victuling and tend- 
ing the widow Chilson two weeks, for fetching a doctor for her, for 
four shillings and six-pence paid to the Dc'". total ^5-14-6" (this 
was in 1749); to Richard Seymour and Eleazer vScott, thirteen 
pounds (the original charge was twenty pounds) for building a 
Pound Near the meeting house In Westbury " in 1750; to Stephen 
Mathews "for making Mr. Wood's cofen"; to Doctor Benjamin 
Warner "for doctoring Edman Scot's family ^10-18-0"; to Thomas 
Barnes "for keeping Hitte Camp and Moll ^23-7-6"; to Ebenezer 
Wakelee "for making Bier and board [for] Chilson 3-0-04" to 
" John Scovill for Listers Dinner, &c., ^^2-12-02 "; to " Thomas Porter 
for taking Coxe's estate and other things"; to "Ebenezer Bronson 
for keeping Moll"; to "John Southmayd for dressing Moll's child 
and writing ^1-18-00"; to "William Selkrigg for digging a grave 
^i-15-oo"; to "Thomas Cole for keeping Thomsan Wood"; to 
"Jonathan Baldwin, Jr. for a pair of sheets ^2-10-00"; to "me 
for rum for the bridg 9 Gallans ^12-12-00; to rum for — Camp 
^03-04-00; to rum for Ebenezer Wostar ,/^2-o5-oo. This is a true 
account from your friend, George Nickols"; to " Gershorm Fulford 
for viewing Derby Road ; selling Phebe Warner's land; his and his 
wives assisting George Scott's wife"; to "Thomas Porter for view- 
ing Derby Road; selling P. Warner's land, and for going to Mr. 
Hopkins to borrow money for the town." In 1747 Daniel South- 
mayd, Abraham Truck, Obadiah Richard, " man, self and 2 cattle," 
Stephen Upson, Thomas Clark and Richard Nickols sent in a bill 
"for Drawing bridge Timber out of the river." In 1754 John 
Bronson sent a bill for dining the County Surveyor and his 
atendence six meals." Even Mr. Leavenworth is credited in 1749 
with three pints of Rhum, two pounds of sugar, a pound of candles, 
half a pound of butter" and "to Bed, boarding Nurses, House 
Room, &c., to the amount of ^13-16-9." 



578 



JUSrORY OF WATERBURY. 



There are also accounts of sales made by the town of the worldly 
goods of deceased persons — sometimes without a mention even, of 
the once-owner's name— the belongings intimating a young man 
without house or home within the town. Occasionally, the load of 
indebtedness is lightened by a ray of neighborly kindliness, or some- 
thing that looks like it, as, in the following, addressed to the consta- 
bles of the town: "These are to Desire you to Abate Caleb 
Thompson of his Country Rate made on the List of 1749 so much as 
by Law ought to come to the Listers." This request was written by 
Daniel Southmayd, and bears his autograph and the signatures of 
his fellow listers, John Warner, Stephen Welton and John Sutliff. 

A list of debts due to the town, lies before me — the date and the 
names I forbear for obvious reasons to give. The following are 
some of the terse conclusions arrived at, and expressed against 
certain of the names of the debtors : " Nothitig done. Ordered to 
be stayed. Given in by the selectmen. Dead and lost. Dead and 
lost I believe. Poor wretch. In dispute. Very poor, and agreed 
to be given in. Poor as Death. Poor enough. Rather poor. As 
poor as you please." The latter is against a prominent member of 
one of the best known families of the Waterbury of to-day. 

In 1749 "it was agreed that in choosing townsmen, constables, 
and grand jurymen, each man should bring in a vote for five towns- 
men with their names fairly written, and so for three constables, 
and so for five grand jurymen." It was in 1749 also that Daniel 
Southmayd was first chosen moderator of the town meeting, an 
office which he held as long as he lived. For a number of years he 
had gradually been taking certain work from his father's over- 
burdened hands. We recognize his handwriting on numerous docu- 
ments. It is a younger, bolder, less finished edition of the perfect 
formula of letters given by Mr. Southmayd for so many years. 
Honors gathered about the young man. At thirty years of age 
he was "established and confirmed" Captain of Waterbury train 
band. He was chosen a deputy for his native town at the 
October session of the General Assembly in 1-748, and re-elected 
seven times. On the tenth of December, 1753, at the Great 
Town Meeting he was moderator, elected townsman, and ap- 
pointed tithingman. Eight days later, he was chosen to his 
last public work. The road, now called the Watertown road, had 
just been laid out, then described as "the highway from the 
bridge up by the west side of the river through Richards's Eight 
acre Lott to the south end of Tompkins's field against Lieut. 
Prindle's House." He, with Thomas Barnes, and Thomas Porter, 
who was Captain Southmayd's lieutenant, were to lay out a passage 



1742 -ilGO. 379 

from the highway on the east side the river to the new one on the 
west side, and was also "to search into the circumstances of the 
mill land and see what title Mr. Baldwin held to the land," for the 
reason that the above passage would pass through a portion of the 
ancient mill land that was laid out in the meadows. 

Twenty-five days after the above meeting the record penned by 
Mr. Southmayd's own hand tells us that " Daniel Southmayd, son of 
John Southmayd, died about eleven o'clock at night, January 12th, 
1754." It is well to believe that Mr. Southmayd's sons were manly, 
winsome men, fitted by birth, environment and education to enact 
deeds of value to their fellow townsmen, and that the loss occa- 
sioned by their taking away was a genuine bereavement to the 
town, as well as to the beneficent patriarch of the early church and 
township. It increases our admiration to behold John Southmayd, 
at the age of seventy-eight years, rising up from the very depth of 
sorrow and goitig on in his fine, patient, effective career, to finish 
his course in the very fore-front of duty. Eighteen days after the 
death of his son Daniel he was present at a town meeting and wit- 
nessed the election of Deacon Timothy Judd as moderator of the 
meeting in that son's place, and, after an hour's adjournment, of 
Captain Samuel Hikcox to his place as townsman, and Jonathan 
Baldwin, Jr., to his place as one of the listers. On the ninth of May 
we find Mr. Southmayd with the legislators of the land at Hartford 
for a long session of the General Assembly, which continued until 
the end of the month, adjourning from time to time. There was no 
royal road of ease to Hartford at that date, and every mile of the 
long journeying on horseback must have been a weariness to a man 
of Mr. Southmayd's years. At the May town meeting he was on 
duty, when "it was voted that the town should commence a suit 
against Litchfield for not perambulating"; also, that "the town 
would be at the charge of paying the surveyor and chainmen for 
their time and expenses, and the expenses of the waiters in meas- 
uring and planning and settling our north line on the east side the 
river between Hartford and Windsor proprietors and this town." 
He was also present at the great town meeting in December, 1754, 
when the meeting was opened by prayer by the Rev.'' Mr. Samuel 
Todd, and when Mr. Southmayd was chosen town clerk for the 
thirty-fifth successive year, and town treasurer. At the March 
meeting following, Mr. Southma3^d was absent and Timothy Judd 
was appointed to take the notes. At a later date, Mr. South- 
mayd made record of the meeting. His days of service were 
drawing to a close. The last record made by him, that has been 
noticed, was on the tenth of May, when he recorded the laying 



gQ BISTORT OF WATERBURT. 

out of a hig-hway in the western part of the town by Dr. Power's 

home lot. 

Of the last 'summer of Mr. vSouthmayd's life, we have no 
knowledge. He died November 14, 1755, at the age of seventy-nine 
years and three months. Few men have been permitted to serve 
any New England town for so long a period, and through so many 
forms of service, as did John Southmayd. Forty years he was 
pastor of the only Church of Christ, where now there are forty 
churches; thirty-five years the town clerk over a territory 
embracing one hundred and twenty-five square miles; proprietor's 
clerk for an equal length of time, and occasionally serving the 
town as recorder from the year 1709 to the date of his election to 
that ofhce in 1721; representing AVaterbury repeatedly in the 
General Assembly; sixteen times appointed justice of the peace for 
Waterbury, and several times for the county; serving the General 
Assembly on its committees on numerous occasions, and serving 
the people of Waterbury as councilor and legal adviser on every 
conceivable occasion, he rounded out his life into a formula of 
active beneficence, whose unseen influence is evident in every crisis 
of the town, whether temporal, mortal, or religious. Every man 
who stood at the helm in the little storm-tossed ship of affairs at 
his coming in 1699 had passed on and been gathered to his 
fathers when this man finished his course and was laid to rest in 
the centre of the group of vSouthmayd graves in the old burial 
place.* All that now remains of that group is a photograph. The 
Silas Bronson Library building covers its site. 

Three weeks after Mr. vSouthmayd's decease the December 
town meeting was held. Mr. Leavenworth was present and opened 
the meeting with prayer. Deacon Thomas Clark was chosen 
to the offices of town clerk, which he held until his death in 
1764, and town treasurer. It is interesting to note that in 1755, 
thirty -eight offices out of seventy -seven were held by persons 
owning the names that held sway before 1700. We find Deacon 
Clark carefully framing with a pen line, the following significant 
act: "It was voted to give Thomas Doolittle his fine for speak- 
ing without liberty in ye town meeting." The bridge at West 
Main street was to be substantially fenced on both sides at the 
town's cost. The Little Pasture at Mr. Southmayd's death re- 
turned to the party concerned. In a proprietors' meeting in 
1756, it was voted that it sh d be for the use of the several 

*In Mr. Southmayd's will, made May 27, 1755, is the following request to the Rev. Mark Leavenworth: 
It is my will that my Executor at the charge of my estate procure and get engraved four head stones and 
four foot stones of Farmington stone, to be set at the head and foot of the graves of my wife, my son John, 
and my son Daniel's grave and my own if I don't live to get some of them in my life time. 



1742-1760. 38r 

schools in the town of Waterbiiry, to be disposed of as the other 
school lands had been. In the town meeting- of 1756, and of 1757, it 
was voted to rent out said pasture for the ensuing- year and put the 
money into the town treasury. In 1756 the service of the county 
surveyor was to be obtained to erect monuments from the white-oak 
tree at the river to Farmington line. In 1759 the bridges had again 
been carried away; for it was voted to give the vSociety of North- 
bury five pounds for the encouragement of a bridge, provided they 
should complete a good cart bridge within a year, to give " the 
gentlemen that have built a bridge over the river at Woodbury 
road, five pounds to be paid unto them within a year from this 
time." The same inducement was offered to Captain Thomas 
Porter to "compleat " one at Judd's Meadow. Two years later the 
town was as bridgeless as ever. 

Unaccountable as it may seem, it was not until 1757 that John 
Stanley, Jr., was finally put into possession of his Bachelor lot, and 
permanently added to the list of proprietors. About this time, 
certain men of large possessions desired to have their lands care- 
fully surveyed and the general plan of the farms placed upon 
record. Of this number, were Stephen Hopkins (for whom Deacon 
Thomas Clark and Captain Daniel Southmayd had made a survey 
and plan) and the heirs of Captain Timothy Hopkins— their land 
lying at Bronson's Meadow, the east side of Long hill, where they 
were allowed to lay out twenty-five additional acres in order to 
complete the survey of their farm. The first local officer at Judd's 
Meadow was Simeon Beebe, appointed keeper of the pound key in 
1759. In the year 1760 no town meeting was held until December. 
An unusual number of young men, not long resident in the town, 
were elected to office. Nathaniel Lowre, Reuben Hale, Seth 
Bartholomew and Usael Barker were of the number. The town 
officers were the clerk, treasurer, agent, two packers of provisions 
(in which the colony rate was paid), three constables, eight select- 
men, twenty surveyors of highways, seven fence viewers, nine 
listers, ten grand jurors, eight tithingmen (to compel a proper 
observance of the Sabbath in meeting houses, church and town), 
two gagers, a sealer of weights and measures, three key keepers for 
the pounds, an excise man, a receiver of provisions, three 
leather sealers, three branders of horses, and three collectors of 
rates, one for each parish. It was evidently deemed wise to 
interest as many inhabitants as possible in the good government of 
the township. For perhaps the first time the selectmen were 
given power to abate the town rates of poor men who made applica- 
tion to them, and "a premium of three shillings was oft'ered for the 



^2 HISTORY OF WATEUBURY. 

killino- or destroying" a grown wild cat, and two shillings for a 
fox if killed by an inhabitant within the town bounds. The select- 
man giving an order for the premium was first to cut olf the right 
ear of the cat or fox shown to him, to prevent a repetition of 
reward for the same animal. 

The rigidity of the rule against new inhabitants who did not at 
once become land owners and otherwise fortify themselves against 
the possibility of becoming town incumbrances was evidently 
softening. In evidence, we find the following paper, with auto- 
graph signatures: 

We, the subscribers, being neighbors to Mr. Ebenezer Bradley of Northbury 
do certifye that We Esteem him the sd Bradley an Honest, Industrious man and 
that he and his family are likely to prove wholesome inhabitants. 

Waterbury, February 26th, 1759. 

thomas blakeslee Ebe'' Ford 

Jacob Blakslee Asahel Castel 

Caleb Tompson Isaack Castel 

Gedion Allen John How 

moses blakslee Ebenezer Curtis 
Ebenezer Allen 

The judgment of Mr. Bradley's neighbors was undoubtedly 
justified. In his record of the above testimonial, Thomas Clark 
omitted the signature of Caleb Tompson — not so important an 
omission, however, as that of the early recorder who failed to give 
the name of Benjamin Judd, in his record of the original planters 
of the town. 



CHAPTER XXX. 

SERGEANTS FIRST COMMISSIONED OFFICER FIRST LIEUTENANT FIRST 

CAPTAIN FIRST MILITIA COMPANY IN 1689 TWO COMPANIES IN 

1732 THIRD COMPANY IN 1740 WATERBURY IN THE SPANISH 

WEST INDIAN WAR CAPTAIN HOPKINS A RECRUITING OFFICER 

WATERBURY's GRAVES ON CAPE BRETON A NORTHBURY TRAIN 

BAND IN 1754 WATERBURY IN THE FRENCH AND INDIAN WAR 

MUSTER-ROLLS— ISRAEL CALKINS' MEMORIAL. 

'""T^HE evolution of the military life of the Colony from the time 
j[ Avhen Major Mason g-ave thirty days in the year to training 
the men of Hartford, Windsor and Wethersfield, is of inter- 
est, but we must limit the recital to the simple fact that in 1739 all 
the military companies then in being had been formed into thir 
teen regiments, and their respective field officers appointed. The 
tenth regiment was composed of the train bands of Waterbury, of 
Wallingford, the parish of Southington, and Durham. Its field 
officers were Colonel James Wadsworth of Hartford, Lieutenant- 
Colonel Benjamin Hall, and Major Thomas Miles of Wallingford. 

Because of its numerical weakness, the Waterbury train hand 
had no commissioned officer until 1689 Its earliest sergeants were 
John Stanley (who had been a lieutenant in Farmington), and 
Thomas Judd. They are so called in 1684. Our only knowledge of 
the sergeants of the township is derived through Mr. Southmayd's 
perfect system of nomenclature in his records of town meetings. 
Not once have we failed to find him giving the individual his mili- 
tary title in the year following its bestowment by commission. 
The following is the list of sergeants, as supplied by him, from 1721 
down to the year 1754. The names are given in the order of their 
election. Sergeants John Stanley, Thomas Judd, Samuel Hikcox, 
Timothy Stanley, Isaac Bronson, Thomas Judd (Deacon), John 
■ Hopkins, Steven Upson, John Scovill, John Bronson, David Scott, 
Thomas Hikcox, William Judd, Richard Welton, Joseph Lewis, 
Thomas Clark, Thomas Bronson, Samuel Warner, John Bronson, Jr., 
Benjamin Warner, Thomas Richards, John Judd, Thomas Barnes, 
Thomas Porter, Richard Welton, Jacob Blakslee, Nathan Beard, 
Obadiah Warner, Thomas Hikcox, John Warner, William Scovill, 
Nathaniel Arnold, Gershom Fulford, Jonathan Prindle, James 
Prichard, Samuel Scott, Obadiah Richards, John Lewis, Oba- 
diah Warner, Jonathan Prindle, John Sutliff, Amos Hikcox, and 



o, mSTOBY OF WATERBURY. 

Thomas Bronson. Where names have been repeated, the person- 
ality was not identical. 

Thomas Judd (Sen.) was the first commissioned officer in the 
town. He was appointed an ensign in 1689. John Stanley was the 
first lieutenant — in 16S9. Thomas Judd, nephew of the first ensign, 
was the first captain— in 17 15. Other captains were Dr. Ephraim 
Warner, in 1722; William Hikcox, son of Sergt. vSamuel, in 1727; 
William Judd, son of the first captain, in 1730 (upon the death of 
William Hikcox). In 1732, when Waterbury was entitled to a 
second company, Timothy Hopkins was made its captain, Thomas 
Bronson its lieutenant, and Stephen Upson its ensign — the com- 
missioned officers of the First company at that date being Captain 
William Judd, Lieutenant vSamuel Hikcox, and Ensign John Scovill. 
The sixth captain was Samuel Hikcox of the First company, in 1737. 

In 1740 the Third company was formed, with Thomas Blackslee, 
captain, John Bronson, lieutenant, and Daniel Curtiss, ensign. 

Although we are not able to give individual instances of special 
devotion to warfare during the earlier years of town life, we have 
learned that certain of our planters held interest in land conferred 
upon their fathers for services in the Pequot massacre; we have 
inferentially believed that they very generally did service during 
King Philip's war; we also know that they protected their own 
fields and firesides during all the long and agonizing periods of 
Indian warfare — but in 1740 a new condition arose. England 
declared war against Spain and sent over a proclamation to her 
colonies in America announcing that fact, and also that an expedi- 
tion was fitting out against the vSpanish West Indies, and offering 
to any of her colonists who would volunteer to serve in that expe- 
dition, a supply of arms and proper clothing, promising that they 
should be paid b}?" King George, and should be under the command 
of officers appointed by the Governor. They were also assured that 
they should share in the booty which might be taken from the 
enemy, and when the expedition should be over, that they should 
be sent back to their homes. An additional inducement offered was 
five pounds, as a premium — to be paid out of the colony treasury. 
In July, 1740, the utmost activity prevailed throughout the colony. 
Beside putting the sea-coast on the defensive, the government 
obtained three vessels to transport the troops to Cuba, and provided 
every needful thing for the men, except clothing, tents, arms, 
ammunition, and pay, and immediately began the building of the 
war-ship, The Defence. 

No known muster-rolls of the men engaged in this expedition 
are extant, and but three names are known to the writer, of Water- 



WATERBURY IN THE COLONIAL WARS. 385 

bury men who had active part in that warfare. Josiah Arnold, a 
young, unmarried man, of perhaps twenty-eight years, the son of 
Nathaniel Arnold, made his will on the 4th day of July, 1740, in 
which he announces that he is designed to go into the war in the 
Spanish West Indies. On the same 4th of July, Ephraim Bissell 
made his will, with the same announcement (both wills doubtless 
written by Mr. Southmayd). Neither of the young men returned 
from the war. Careful research might disclose names of other 
soldiers from Waterbury. In August, 1741, recruits were called for, 
and a letter containing instructions concerning the levying of 
troops was sent to "Captain Hopkins." Our Captain Timothy 
Hopkins is the only Captain Hopkins to be found in the colony at 
that date, therefore he may have been the recruiting officer who 
with Captain Winslow proceeded to enlist not less than fifty, nor 
more than two hundred men " to be transported to the isle of Cuba 
in the colony sloop, The Defence." The recruiting officers were 
empowered to draw four pounds from the public treasury for each 
inan enlisted. Under the above circumstances, it is perfectly 
reasonable to infer that a goodly number of young men were 
enlisted by our Captain Hopkins. Young men, under twenty-one, 
and without families, drop away and leave no sign in the public 
records. Doubtless certain of the missing sons of Waterbury fell 
on Cuban soil in 1740 and 1741, whose names may be found on mus- 
ter-rolls yet to be returned from their long concealment. In 1743 
Stephen Upson was made captain of the First company in Water- 
bury. 

In February, 1745, the Governor of the Colony convened the 
Assembly, to act upon a proposed expedition against his Majesty's 
enemies at Cape Breton. As early as 1731 France had encroached 
upon the claimed territory of New York, by building a fort at 
Crown Point, which encroachment at once called forth an urgent 
appeal from that Province to the English crown, in which appeal 
Connecticut had been requested to join. Meanwhile, on the island 
of Cape Breton, commanding the entrance to the Bay of St. Law- 
rence, France had constructed a fortress of wonderful strength, at 
a cost of ^1,200,000 sterling. Its ruins to-day give full evidence of 
the formidality of this ancient stronghold. The solidity of the 
foundation-walls of its citadel and its "shattered bomb-proofs, 
whose well-turned arches choked with debris remain," are cited by 
S. A. Drake, while he tells us that one may continue the walk along 
the ramparts without once quitting them, for fully a mile, to the 
point where they touch the sea-shore among the inaccessible rocks 
and heavino- surf of the ocean itself. 



i86 



BISTORT OF WATERS URY. 



It was the great fortress at Louisburg, on the island of CajDe 
Breton, that caused Mr. John Southmayd to take the wintry ride 
on horseback from Waterbtiry to Hartford in February, 1745— that 
called up every deputy throughout the colony to the same place. 
Not England — she was too busy elsewhere — but her weak American 
colonies resolved to take the French city and fortress. The utter 
amazement with which the project was received by the deputies 
may be imagined, but not described. It is mentioned as a "matter 
of great importance." The Assembly considered two letters written 
by Governor vShirley of Massachusetts, and other papers presented 
— and then "concluded and resolved (relying on the blessing of 
Almighty God) to join with the neighboring governments in the 
intended expedition." 

The first step in the work was to encourage five himdred men to 
enlist themselves to join the forces from the neighboring govern- 
ments in the expedition. The inducements offered were the receipt 
of "eight pounds in old tenour bills" for each month of service, 
with ten pounds as a premium if the enlisting soldier provided for 
himself " a good fire-lock, sword, belt, cartridge box, and blanket, 
to the acceptance of the enlisting officer." He was also to receive 
one month's wages before embarkation; three pounds additional if 
he provided his own blanket, and an equal share in all the plunder 
with the soldiers of the neighboring governments. The land forces 
were to march to New London, and there embark on transports 
which were to be convoyed by the Colony sloop, The Defence, 
"equipped and manned with her full complement of officers and 
men." The five hundred men were divided into eight companies 
under Roger Wolcott as Commander-in-Chief. 

The experience of 1740 in the Spanish West-Indies had been 
severe, and it evidently told effectively upon the spirits of the 
colonists, for the enlistments were not encouraging. A month later 
the "enlisting officers were authorized to beat up the drums in the 
regiments, and the captains were ordered to call their companies 
together under their command for enlisting volunteers, when 
required to do so. In May two companies more were made ready and 
sent to New London to await the transports. In July, it was neces- 
sary to raise three hundred men in addition to the seven hundred 
already gone. The three hundred men were to consist of three 
companies. Our Captain Samuel Hikcox was placed in command 
of one third of the recruits to be then enlisted as their captain for 
the expedition; but before the companies were in readiness news 
came that the fortresses at Louisburg had surrendered on the loth 
of June, after a close siege of forty-nine days. 



WATERBURY IN THE COLONIAL WARS. 



387 



Immediately, 350 men were enlisted to garrison the fortresses 
and town of Louisburg until the following June. Among the 
Waterbury men who were of the garrison quota, and who doubtless 
had already enlisted in Captain Hikcox's company, was Samuel 
Thomas, a neighbor of the Captain's, who died at Cape Breton in 
1747. Another soldier was Daniel Warner, the son of Samuel 
Warner. "On the morning of the day whereon he left his father's 
house in Waterbury (being called as a soldier to go to Cape Breton) 
in the month of November, 1745, he made a verbal declaration con- 
cerning his worldly goods — how they should be disposed in case of 
his never returning," and called Thomas Warner of Waterbury, and 
Elizabeth Warner of Stonington to v/itness his will, "which was 
spoken in the street near to Daniel's father's house." He com- 
mitted all his worldly estate into the hands of his brother, Timothy 
Warner, "who was to pay his debts, and on his return to restore all 
his estate to him again, and, in case he never returned, Timothy 
was to have all, as his own." Daniel never returned to reclaim his 
estate. An old indenture is extant, through which it is made 
evident that Abraham Barnes, son of Samuel, was a third young 
man who lost his life in the same expedition. His little son 
Abraham, at the age of two years was indentured to serve a 
neighbor for nineteen years, in which it is stated that his father 
died at Cape Breton. This is clearly a case of adoption, perhaps 
under the only formula then known as legal. Waterbury thus owns 
three of the five hundred graves that lie in the bleak and wind- 
swept field bordering the harbor of Louisburg — the graves of 
Samuel Thomas, Daniel Warner, and Abraham Barnes. How many 
more young men served and returned, or served and perished there 
we may not tell. 

Thomas Hikcox (2d) was commissioned captain in 1746 of the 
First company in Waterbury; Daniel Southmayd in 1747; John 
Bronson in 1757. In 1752 the Fourth company was formed— in 
Westbury parish— with Nathaniel Arnold, Jr., captain; Jonathan 
Prindle, lieutenant; Timothy Judd, ensign. In 1754 Thomas Porter 
became captain of the First company, by reason of the death of 
Captain Daniel Southmayd, with Obadiah Richards, lieutenant, and 
John Lewis, ensign. In 1754, the officers of the Northbury Parish 
company were Phineas Royce, captain; John Sutliff, lieutenant; 
Zachariah Sanford, ensign. 

In 1757 Jonathan Beebe was second lieutenant of the 13th com- 
pany in the loth regiment. In the same year the officers of the 
Westbury company were Capt. Timothy Judd, Lieut. Ebenezer 
Richards, Ens. Edward Scovill. In 1756 Israel Woodward was cap- 



gg HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

tain of the 6tli company in the 2d regiment. In 1759 George 
Nichols was captain in Waterbury. In 1760 Phineas Castle served 
as captain of the 12th company in the 2d regiment, of which regi- 
ment the Rev. Mark Leavenworth was chaplain. In 1760 also, 
Gideon Hotchkiss became captain of the First company in Water- 
bury, and Stephen Upson (the third) became lieutenant of a com- 
pany called the vSouth company, with Jonathan Baldwin its ensign. 
In 1 76 1 Oliver Welton was ensign of the 5th company in the 2d reg- 
iment; Edward Scovill was made captain of the First company of 
Waterbury and Amos Hitchcock or Hickcox lieutenant. In 1762 
Stephen Culver was lieutenant. Moses Blakslee was lieutenant in 
the 6th company of the 7th regiment and Timothy Clark lieutenant 
in the 4th company of the 12th regiment. In 1763 Thomas Richards 
was captain, John Nettleton lieutenant and Abel Woodward ensign 
of the Westbury company. In the same year Joseph Bronson was 
lieutenant and William Hikcox ensign in the Second company in 
the First society; Samuel Hikcox, Jr., was ensign of the First com- 
pany in the same society and Stephen Seymour of the Northbury 
company. In 1764 Stephen Upson was captain of the First com- 
pany; in 1765 Joseph Bronson of the vSccond company with William 
Hikcox his lieutenant; the officers of a new company in Northbury 
were Captain John Sutliff, Lieut. Stephen Seymour, Ens. David 
Blakslee — Lieut. Benjamin Upson and Ens. Samuel Curtis, Jr., 
belonging to the old company. In 1764 also the East company in 
Westbury was formed imder Capt. Samuel Reynolds. In 1766 the 
officers of the Second company in the First society were Lieut. 
Samuel Hikcox and Ens. Stephen Welton — in the autumn of that 
year Capt. John Welton, Lieut. Jesse Leavenworth and Ens. Abra- 
ham Hikcox commanded the compan}^, while Lieut. Abel Woodward 
and Ens. Peter Welton were of the West company in Westbury In 
1766 there was a "new erected company" in Farmingbury com- 
manded by Capt. Aaron Harrison, Lieut. Heman Hall and Ens. 
Josiah Rogers. In 1767 Capt. Jonathan Baldwin, Lieut. Andrew 
Bronson and Ens. Samuel Porter commanded the First company. 
Daniel Potter was captain of the First company at Northbury. In 
1769 Randal Evans was captain of the same compan}^, and Bartholo- 
mew Pond lieutenant; Abel Woodward, Peter Welton and Thomas 
Cole were the officers of the West company in Westbury; Samuel 
Hikcox was captain and Richard Seymour lieutenant of the Second 
company in the First society; and Samuel Porter was lieutenant of 
the First company. In the Farmingbury company, Josiah Rogers 
was lieutenant and John Alcock ensign. Of the new company in 
Northbury, David Blakslee was captain, Eliphalet Hartshorn lieu- 
tenant, and jude Blakslee ensign. 



WATERBTJRY IN THE COLONIAL WARS. 389 

In 1753 Captain Daniel Southniayd was one of eight gentlemen 
appointed to audit the Colony accounts. The treasurer delivered 
to them ^75 2 7. 1 28. gd. old tenor, received by the treasurer for duties 
on goods, exportation of luinber, for the sale of Weed's estate [in 
Waterbury], and for impost and powder money. This money the 
auditors "burnt and consumed to ashes." Its value, as lawful 
money, was but ^85 5. 8s. 2d, or eight and more than two-third pounds 
for one of old tenor. This depreciation of the currency was due 
principally and we might add with an approach to truth, chiefly and 
altogether because the colony had been compelled to fight England's 
wars. The exact relationship to lawful silver money that bills of 
old and new tenor bore at this time is illustrated by a three-farthing 
silver-money tax, which it was declared permissible to pay in bills 
of credit — the new tenor, at fourteen shillings and seven pence 
for six shillings in silver, the old tenor at fifty-one shillings for the 
same six shillings. 

Early in 1755 the call again came for "a considerable number of 
forces to be raised because of the invasion of his Majesty's just 
rights and dominions in North Ainerica, b}^ the French and the 
Indians in their alliance." The order of King George, that Con- 
necticut Colony should contribute as far as could be afforded to 
repel the common danger, was at once complied with. More money 
was required than could be well obtained, but more Bills of credit 
were at once ordered to be imprinted, representing seven thousand 
five hundred pounds lawful money, and a committee was appointed 
to make preparations for enlisting, supplying, and furnishing troops 
at the cost and expense of the government. Almost immediately 
came the order from England for the raising of several regiments. 
England's designs in regard to the regiments — where and how they 
were to be used — remained unknown, when, at the session of The 
Assembly summoned in March, 1755, a proposition was received 
from Governor vShirley of Massachusetts. It was that the five New 
England governments should unite in an attempt to erect a strong 
fortress upon the eminence near the French fort at Crown Point. 
In order that the expedition might be eminently successful and 
the territory secured from any further encroachment of the French, 
it was proposed that New York should send Soo men, Connecticut 
1000, Rhode Island 400, Massachusetts 1200 and New Hampshire 
600. Connecticut was fully aware that the force asked of her was 
much too large in proportion to that of New York and Massachu- 
setts, but she stopped to consider the situation of her neighbors, 
and understood full well the importance of the undertaking, and 
at once began the ta.sk of o-etting together one thousand " effective 



HISTORY OF WATERS U BY. 

men " and empowered her Governor to raise 500 additional men, in 
case they should be required to reinforce troops already in service, 
and immediately advised her neighbors to do the same thing-. 
Each member of the General Assembly in March 1755, was re- 
quired to swear to keep secret, until given leave to reveal them, 
all matters relating to the "defence of our frontiers, and all con- 
sultations and resolutions thereon." Mr. Stephen Hopkins and 
Mr. Caleb " Humistone " were the required oath-takers for Water- 
bury. 

I think it may be said that at no time in our history has there 
been a season of greater activity in martial life than the year 1755. 
It is not known that any men from Waterbury were numbered 
among the three thousand warriors who regained Nova Scotia in 
June of that year; it is not probable that a single man of our town 
was with General Braddock in his memorable defeat near Fort du 
Quesne in July, but we have every reason to think that a goodly 
number accompanied General Johnson to Lake George in August 
of that year, and joined the brave twelve hundred who fought on 
its shores — for Gershom Fulford, the blacksmith, was appointed 
second lieutenant of the Fourth Company in the Major General's 
regmient, and Roger Prichard " quarter-master of Troop of horse 
in the Tenth regiment " in March of that year, but we have no 
muster-rolls to prove the thought to be according to facts. When, 
in May, Oliver De Lancey, Esq"", of New York, appeared before the 
Assembly and set before the deputies the exceeding great impor- 
tance of raising additional men for Crown Point, it was determined 
to give New York the opportunity to raise three hundred men in 
Connecticut, to serve under a major of that Province — other officers 
to be appointed by this Colony. 

In August, General Johnson, at Fort Edward, sent for additional 
troops to be sent without delay, and the order went forth for two 
regiments of seven hundred and fifty men to be enlisted, and 
divided into nine companies in each regiment. The muster rolls of 
certain Connecticut companies in service from 1755 to 1762 have 
been recently recovered from their long resting place, and are now 
in the State library. They have never been published, and are of 
valuable interest. Between the first and the seventeenth of Sep- 
tember, 1755, the following men enlisted, or were impressed into 
service, in the company of Captain Eldad Lewis, of Southington. 
The men of this company were from Waterbury and its vicinity. 
Of its seventy-three men, thirty-four went from Waterbury. We 
have identified these from local records. Other names in the com- 
pany doubtless belong to Waterbury men, but for want of sufficient 



WATERBURT IN THE COLONIAL WARS. 



391 



evidence at hand they are not included. The names marked with 
a f were from Waterbury. 

Captain Eldad Lewis's Muster Roll. 
Sworn to at Hartford Feb. 17th, 1756. 

First Lieutenant, Isaac Higbee; Second Lieutenant, David Whitney; Sergeants, 
Joel Clark,* fSamuel Root— deserted Oct. 24th, fTim" Clark, John Webster. 

Clerks, Drummers and Corporals — Joel Clark, clerk; fAshbel Porter, Samuel 
Higby, fisaac Prichard, Ephr'' Parker, Ambro* Sloper, corporals and drummers. 

Ce.ntinels. 



Abraham Waters, 
f Abel Gunn, 

Allen Royse, 

Amos Cook, 
f Asa Barnes, 

Barn-' Hugh, 
f Benj" vScott, 
f Benj" AVetmore, 
t Benj" Turril, 
t Benj" Stillwell, 
f Caleb Jones, 

David Wetmore, 
f David Hungerford, 
f Dan' Upson, 

Dan' Winston, 

Eben'' Hopkinston, 
f Ezek' Scott, 
f Eliph" Scott, 

Eben'' Bracket, 

Elias Wetmore, 
f John Scott, 

Joseph Twiss, 
f Joseph Barrot, 
f John Barrot, 
f Jesse Alcock, 



Joseph Rogers, 

Elihu Morse, 
f Abraham Woster, 

Jesse Parker, 
f James Doolittle, 
f Josiah Stow, 
f Joseph Ludington, 
f Jon"' Preston, 

Levi Thomas, 

Linus Hopsk", 

Medad Munson, 
f Moses Foot, 

Moses Hall,:!: 
f Moses Bronson, 

Nathan' Hitchcock, 

Nathan' Messenger, 

Peter Fenn, [?] 

Joseph Merion, 

James Scarrit, 

Job Bracket, 

Hail Hall, 
f Sam' Upson, 
f Sol" Barrit, 

Steph" Winston, 
f Steph" Blakslee, 



f Weight Woster, 

Sam' AVhedon, 
f Sam' Wheler, ? 
f Jabez Tuttle, 
f Thomas Way, 

John Collins, 

Willida William, 

William Pike, 

Zealous Atkins, 

Zebulon Peck, 

Remember Baker, 
f Sam' Warner, 

Abijah Barnes, 
f Enos Ford, 
f Thomas Fenn, 

Peter Judson, 

Elnath" Sharp, or 
Thorp, 
f Sam'l How, 
f Ebem' Saxston, 

Matth"' Johnson, 

Nath' Lewis, 

Moses Austin, 
f Bartholomew Pond. 



The above company served about three months and the men 
were allowed twelve days for the march from Lake George to their 
homes. ij 

Other Waterbury soldiers of 1755, were Henry Cook, Bartholo- 
mew Jacobs, Bela Lewis, and William Mancer, but these names do 
not conclude the list. It was to carry bread to these and other 
soldiers that the horses of the two Waterbury men were impressed 
in October of 1755. Bread and flour to the amount of 120,000 pounds 

* Dr. Bronson gives Joel Clark as a Waterbury man, but I think he was from Farmington. 
% " Died on the 25th." 

S In the lists here given, the reader may make allowance for errors in the spelling of names, due to the 
muster-roll makers, and also for possible errors in the transcription of names from the muster rolls. 



392 



HISTORY OF WATEEBURY. 



were carried on horses (not more than 500 in number and impressed 
in Connecticut) from iVlbany or its vicinity "for the use of our 
troops at the forts at the Carrying Place, and at Lake George." 

In the beginning of 1756 it was resolved by the four New Eng- 
land governments, and New York, to raise 10,000 men, Connecticut 
agreeing upon 2500 as her quota and immediately ordering her 
commissaries to procure flour sufficient for that number of men for 
four months. The troops were formed into four regiments of eight 
companies each. The Sixth company in the Second regiment is 
called on the muster roll : 

The Waterbury Company. 

In the Expedition against Crown Point from April to December, 1756, this com- 
pany was commanded by Capt. Israel Woodward. 

First Lieutenant, Asa Royse. Second Lieutenant, Joel Clark, 

f Oliver Welton, f Ethan Curtis, 

J Enoch Curtis, I James Doolittle, 

Sergeants, ] ^^.^ ^,j^^.^_ Corporals, -^ j^^^^ Hoerington, 

I David Woodward. I Abiel Roberts. 

Drummer, Moses Frost. 



Samuel Adams, 
Ephraim Allyn, 
Stephen Bagley, 
Remember Baker, 
John Barret, 
Nathan Benham, 
Joseph Blake, 
Tho'. Bray, 
Asa Brown son, 
John Brownson, 
Moses Brownson, 
Joseph Bunnel, 
Parmineus Bunn', 
John Butler, 
Israel Calkins, 
Elijah Clark, 
Ezekiel Curtis, 
Hezek'' Davenport, 
Jehiel Dayton, 
Stephen Dullf [?] 
Benj" Ehis, 
Benj" Aly (Ely) ? 



Centinei.s. 

John Fenn, 
Joseph Foot, 
vSamuel Frost, 
Luke Fox, 
John Gibbs, 
Jerimi Gillet, 
Jacob Guild, 
Jotham Hall, 
John Haystens, 
Nathi Hitchcock, 
Voluntine Hitchcock, 
William Horton, 
Samuel Lounsbury, 
Nath' Messenger, 
AVm. Munson, 
Judah Palmer, 
Nath' Pardy, 
Eliab Parker, 
John Pai;kei% 
Samuel Pike, 
Elnathan Prichard, 
Joel Roberts, 



Ezekiel Scott,* 
Peleg Spencer, 
Israel Squire, 
Simeon Stow, 
John Strickland, 
Isaac Terril, 
Oliver Terril,' 
Seth Thayer, 
John Tomas, 
Charles Warner, 
Nathi Weed, 
Will™ White, 
Benj" Williams, 
Nathan Woodward, 

clerk, 
Samuel Woodward, 
Benj" AVoodworth, 
Peleg Woodworth, 
Reuben Woodworth, 
Herrman Worster, 
Jonathan Wright, 
Nathan W^right. 



AH the men of this company were not from Waterbury. Enos 
Doolittle, Israel Dayton, and Benjamin Judd were of the soldiers of 



* Advanced to Corporal Sept. 2Sth. 



WATERBURT IN THE COLONIAL WARS. 



393 



'756. John vSutliff and Abel Cnrtiss were in Col. Elihn Chauncy's 
regiment at Crown Point in 1756. In Captain John Pettibone's 
company in the same regiment, among- the men from Waterbury 
will be found Joseph Smith, John Slawter (sometimes spelled 
Slaughter), Samuel Lewis, Thomas Porter, and Joseph Bronson. 
This regiment served sixty-three weeks. 

Dr. Bronson has given the following list of soldiers who went 
in Captain Eldad Lewis' company in the Fort William Henry alarm 
in 1757. At this time the militia marched away in headlong haste; 
some on horseback for a part or the whole of the way, the residue 
on foot — many subsisting themselves at their own expense on 
the march, and others at public and private houses and at small 
stores erected at certain stages of the course, going in haste too 
great to take blankets, or knapsacks, or anything but the soldier 
himself and his fire-arms to the rescue! So great was the risk of 
delay that the horses, when no longer needed, were left to wander 
away, and were taken up in New York, and elsewhere. Months 
afterward, by order of the government, these wandering horses 
were gathered in, and even the Waterbury horses were returned 
to their homes. Under such circumstances went forth the fol- 
lowing men from Waterbury: 



Lieut. John Sutliff, 
Sergt. Stephen ^Velton, 

Jesse Alcock, 
Benjamin Barnes (?)* 
Daniel Barnes, 
Solomon Barrit, 
Simeon Beebe, 
Shadrack Benham, 
Asher Blakeslee, 
Reuben Blakeslee, 
Hezekiah Brown, 
Thomas Cole, 



Moses Cook, [Drummer.] 
Ensign Gideon Hotchkiss, 

Centinels. 
Benjamin Cook [of 

Wallingford,] 
^atjianiel Edwards, 
Ambrose Field (?), 
Nathaniel Foot (?), 
Joel Fro^t,, 
Jonathan Garnsey, 
Thomas Hikcox, 
Samuel Judd,. 
Samuel Lewis, 



Daniel Porter, Clerk. 



_Ste£heji ]\Iatthews,_ 
Abraham Richards, 
Thomas Richards, 

W Scott, 

Oliver Terrill, 
Charles Warner, 
Joseph Warner, 
Eliakim Welton, 
Thomas Williams. 



In 1757, in Col. Phineas Lyman's regiment, Ephraim Preston was 
captain of a company raised for the expedition against Crown 
Point, which company was at Fort Edward in August that year, 
when "Fort William Henry at the head of Lake George, was 
besieged by the French forces under Montcalm. At this time the 
English general, Webb, was lying with an army of four thousand 
men at Fort Edward, fourteen miles distant." It is said that 
" instead of marching to the relief of Col. Munroe and thus savingf 



* Familiar as this name is and Waterbury born, there was no one of the name here at the above date. 



_, HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

394 

the fort Webb wrote him a letter advising his capitulation. The 
messenti'er and letter were intercepted by the Indian allies of Mont- 
calm. The latter, thinking Webb's communication would promote 
his own interests, forwarded it at once to the commander of the 
fort. A capitulation soon followed."* 

The following is the story, as told by the messenger himself who 
bore the letter to Gen. Webb. It was entrusted to Sergeant Israel 
Calkin (later Calkins) a young man, who was married in Waterbury 
by the Rev. Mark Leavenworth, Aug. ii, 1752, to Sarah, the 
daughter of William Hoadley, and who lived at Judd's meadow. 
He told the General Assembly in Oct., 1758, that he "was a sergeant 
in Capt. Ephraim Preston's company in Col. Lyman's regiment, and 
was at Fort Edward in August, 1757; that he was sent by Gen. 
Webb express from Fort Edward, with despatches for Col. Munroe, 
commander of Fort William Henry — that notwithstanding the 
utmost caution, he unhappily fell into the enemy's hands, being taken 
by Indians. After the surrender of the fort he was by savages 
conveyed to Canada, biit was there redeemed out of their hands by a 
French gentleman, but he was immediately taken with small-pox, 
which sore distemper he had very severely — in want of almost 
every comfort, convenience, and accommodation. Being by a kind 
Providence carried safely through that distemper, he sailed Nov. 
5th, 1757, from Quebec for France, where, through inexpressible 
hardships, naked and famished, he arrived in the Port of Rochelle 
on the 2d of December (the day after his daughter vSarah was born 
in Naugatuck.) There, having been confined for fifteen days in a 
loathsome Gaol, he was again taken sick and carried to a hospital. 
After twenty-one days he was returned to Gaol, where he was kept 
under most disagreeable circumstances until placed on board a 
cartel ship for England, which ship was twenty-five days on its 
passage on account of storms, the ship being so crowded that there 
was scarce room enough to lie down, and almost without food or 
clothing. He obtained liberty after four months to return to 
America. He arrived at Boston Oct. 6, 1758. He assured The 
Assembly that during his captivity he had endured calamities, dis- 
tresses, and fatigues that were more than words could express, or 
Imagination could paint, and that on his arrival at his home he 
found that almost all the little Interest he left behind him had been 
dissipated and lost in his absence, and that he, with his wife and 
three small children, was reduced to the lowest state of want and 
necessity " — and all because he had entered upon a most dangerous 
service for his country. He asked for his wages during the 

* Dr. Bronson. 



WATERBURT IN THE COLONIAL WARS. 



395 



time of his captivity and until his return home, and such addi- 
tional compensation as might be granted — and received thirty 
pounds out of the treasury, "in consideration of his fidelity while 
in the service of this Colony and the calamities he sustained in his 
captivity."* 

In the muster roll of Captain Ephraim Preston's regiment we 
find the following Waterbury names in 1757: 
Jonathan Beebe, Second Uzal Barker, 

James Barret, 

Joseph Benham, 

Zera Beebe, 

Henry Cook, 

Jesse Cook, 

Andrew Culver, 



Lieutenant, 
Moses Matthews, Ensign, 
Israel Calkins, Sergeant, 
Phineas Beach, Sergeant, 
Gideon Allen, 
James Baldwin, 



Justus Dayly, 
Saiiiuel Fepp, 
Jesse Hotchkiss, 
Aaron Luddington, 
Bartholomew Pond, 

Josiah^iitQiy^ 

Wait Wooster. 



The above soldiers appear to have gone on the occasion of the 
" Fort William Henry Alarm." 

The muster roll of the following company is given — 'its members 
being from Waterbury and the near-by towns : 



2D REGIMENT — MARCH 

Eldad Lewis, Captain, 

Joel Clark, / t • 4- 

■' ^ Lieutenants, 



Sergeants, 



Gideon Hotchki 

Thomas Richards, Ensign 

Abel Woodward, ] 

Joab Horsington, I 

Abiel Roberts, ( 

Ethan Curtis, j 

Samuel Adams, 

David Arnold, 

Moses Ball4 

David Barnes, 

John Barrit, 

Merwin Beckwith, 

Benj. Benham, 

Samuel Berley, 

John Bill, 

Moses Bronson, 

James Brown, 

Parmenius Bunnel, 

Parmenius Bunnel, 

John Chapman, 
Silas Chapman, 



27 TO NOV. 16, 175S. 

Osee Webster, Clerk, 

Cephas Ford.f ^ 

Tim. Hotchkiss. I 

Sam. Wheeden, \ ^^"'iTorals, 

John Strecklin, J 

Ambrose Sloper, ) y-. 

^ r Drummers, 

Moses Frost, ) 



David Clark, 
Lemuel Collins, 
Jesse Cook, 
Abner Curtiss, 
David Curtiss, 
James Curtiss, 
Joshua Curtiss, 
Phineas Curtiss, 
Cornelius Dunham, 

Na th' E dwards, 

Samuel Ellwell, 
Luther Evans, 
Eben. Fancher, || 
John Fancher, 
David Fenn, 
Samuel Fenn. 



Samuel Frosty 

Jon. Fulford. 
Henry Grilley, 
Eben. Hart, 
Josiah Hart, 
Jason Harvard. •[ 
Amos Hitchcock, 
Reuben Hitchcock. 
David Hotchkiss, 
John How 
Samuel How, 
David Hungerford,** 
Joseph Ives, 
William Judd. 
Samuel Kellogg, ff 
Bela Lewis. 



*The next year Israel Calkins removed to Walpole, N. H., where his son Roswell was born. In 1764 he 
had returned to Waterbury, and continued to pay taxes until 1782. 

tDiedNov. 3. :|; Died Oct. 7. g Died Aug. 23. II Died Aug. 18. •[ Died Sept. 29. 

**Died July 22. ttDiedSept. 13. 



396 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

2D REGIMENT— MARCH 27 TO NOV. 16, l-JS^—COniZHUed. 



Abr. Luttington, 
Joseph Lvittington, 
Solomon Luttington, 
Eldad Mix, 
William Munson, 
David Newel, 
Wonks Nobikin 
James Noisons, 
Judali Palmer, 
David Pardee, 
Nath' Pardee, 
Eliab Parker, 
Gideon Parker, 



Aaron Parsons, 
Samuel Pike, 
William Pike,* 
Jonathan Prichard, 
Eben. Prindle, 
Sam. Richards, f 
Eben. Robard^^ 
Barnabas Scott, 
_Eben. Scott, 
Ezekiel Scott, 
John Slater, 
Kinner Smith, 
Samuel Sperry, 



Other soldiers of 1758 were : 



Joseph Atkins, 

Joseph Blake, 

Lieut. Phineas Castle, 



Dan. Chatfield, 
Lemuel Chatfield, 
Dan. McNamara, 



jBenj. Stillwell,:}: ___ 
Lemuel Thomas, 
Gideon Todd, 
Samuel Upson, 
Thomas Warner, 
Thomas Way, 
Nath' Welton, 
Oliver Welton, 
Abner Wetmore, § 
Barth. Williams, 
Benjamin Williams, 
Jobe Yale, || 
Street Yale. 



Isaac Peck, 
Jabez Wooster. 



In 1759 Abel Woodward was sergeant under vSamuel Gaylord in 
the first regiment, and Benjamin vStillwell, corporal. In the second 
regiment, Moses Sanford and Jesse Ford were sergeants under Cap- 
tain Thomas Wilmot; Justus Blakeslee, Tille Blakeslee (perhaps of 
Woodbury), John Fulford, Caleb Granniss and James Hungerford, 
who died December 2, were " centinels " or private soldiers. Lieu- 
tenant Jonathan Beebe, and Sergeant Israel Calkins were under 
Captain Amos Hitchcock, as was also Jabez Tuttle. In Captain Joel 
Clark's company, Oliver Welton was sergeant, David Arnold, Wait 
Hotchkiss, Eliphalet Preston, James Scarret, Caleb Thompson and 
Gideon Webb were "centinels." In the third regiment, in Capt. 
Mead's company were Ira Beebe, Isaac Curtis, Samuel Curtis, Isaac 
Darrow, John Palmer and Abraham Prichard. 

In 1761, in Colonel Whiting's regiment, were: 



Samuel Adams, Ensign, 
Johnson Anderson, Corp., 
Titus Barnes, 
Daniel Byington, 
Jehiel Byington, 
Joel Byington, 
Jonathan Byington, 
Benjamin Cook, 



Moses Cook, / 
Israel Dayton,^ 
David Doolittle, 
_MosesFrost^pruninier, 
Ambrose Hikcox, 
Jude Hoadley, 
Bartholomew Jacobs, 
Brewster Judd, 



Thomas Judd, 
William Judd, . 
Abraham Lewis, 
Gains Prichard, 
John Painter, 
Nathan Prindle, 
Eben vSaxton, 
Jehiel Saxton, 



* Died Sept. 16. + Died Aug. 28. 

% Benjamin Stillwell was enlisted among other soldiers for this e.xpedition by Lieut. Hotchkiss. Still- 
well broke his arm just after enlisting. Dr. Porter set it, and he marched with his company. In October, 
1770, Lieut. Hotchkiss asked the Colony for remuneration for Dr. Porter's services, and received it. 

§ Died Sept. 4. || Deserted Sept. 4. • 



WATERBURT IN THE COLONIAL WARS. 



397 



AVoolsejLSeoti, 
Stephen Scovill, 
Nath' Selkrig, Serg., 
Joash Seymour, 
Sam. vStow, 
John StrickUn,* 



Hez. Tuttle, 
Jabez Tuttle, 
Reuben Tuttle, Corp., 
Gideon Webb, 
Ezekiel Walton, 



Stephen Welton, 
Benj. AVilliams, 
Dan. Williams, 
Obadiah Winters, 
Rufus Yarrington. 



Captain Eldad Lewis served under Colonel Whiting- in the first 
regiment from March 15 to December 3, in the year 1762. His 
officers were: 

^^^ [Samuel] Judd.f } Lieutenants. 
'""^ John Collins, ) 

Oliver Welton, Ensign, 



Asa Bray, 
William Judd, 
Dan Collins, 
Jabez Tuttle, 
John Miles, 
Jesse Cook, 



1 



)■ vSergeants. 
I 

i 
J • 



Eldad Mix, 
Andrew Culver, 
■Joel Roberts, 
John Bronson, 



1 



Corporals. 



Waterbury names among the centinels were: 



Abraham Barnes, 
Bordon Beebe, 
Isaac Castle, 
> Charles Cook, 
Jesse Cook, 
Thomas Fancher, 



Jonatlian Fulford, 
James Harrison, 
Elijah Hotchkiss, 
John Lewis, 
.Aaron Luddington, 



Abner ^lunson, 
John Parker, 
Samuel Potter, 
Gains Prichard, 
John Scovil. 



Waterbury has been found nobly to have acted her part in the 
Colonial wars. The result of this expenditure of life, service and 
money, was, that every pound the English colonists taxed them- 
selves for; every soldier they furnished to fight England's war with 
France, cost the colonies themselves, a little later in their history, 
untold sums of money, and unrecorded lists of human lives. Their 
ability and achievement excited the attention of England and 
aroused apprehension regarding- her own supremacy over this part 
of her kingdom. It also awakened the colonists themselves to the 
fact of their own united strength. Thus was sown the seed of 
Independence, the cotyledons of which the colonists themselves 
failed to recognize. 



* Died August 6. 



+ App. April 29, 1760. 



CHAPTER XXXI. 

A PETITION FROM THE WEST FARMS FOR WINTER PRIVILEGES A COL- 
LECTOR OF EXCISE MEN OF FARMINGBURY PETITION FOR WINTER 

PRIVILEGES A PROPOSAL TO MAKE NAVIGABLE THE NAUGATUCK 

j^IVER DEATH OF DEACON THOMAS CLARK MR. LEAVENWORTH 

MARRIES A BROTHER MINISTER AT MIDNIGHT BURYING YARD AT 

PRESENT WOLCOTT DEATH OF CAPTAIN SAMUEL HIKCOX AU- 
THORITY OF THE FIRST CHURCH LAID ASIDE THE STAMP ACT A 

COLONIAL CONGRESS HELD IN NEW YORK THE NEWSPAPER 

"GLORIOUS news" REPEAL OF THE STAMP ACT — A MAY THANKS- 

QIVING HARTFORD'S SORROW ISAAC FRAZIER THE FRENCH 

FAMILY — WOODBURY COUNTY A PETITION FROM THE SOUTH 

FARMS BAPTISTS MINISTRY LANDS AND MONEYS — FARMINGBURY 

SOCIETY MIDDLEBURY BURYING YARD. 

DURING the period of the French and Indian war and in the 
subsequent time down to the dawning of the war of the 
American Revolution, Waterbury moved onward in her 
town life without any startling deviations from her accustomed 
course. 

In October, 1760, Josiah Bronson and other inhabitants of present 
Middlebury and its vicinity, complaining of their sufferings 
endured in reaching places of public w^orship because of distance 
and the badness of roads, besought the General Assembly to grant 
them winter privileges under the usual forms. The petition was 
granted — the time being from the first day of December to the last 
of March, annually, for three years. In the lines given as the 
boundaries of the territory, mention is made of Eight Mile brook, 
Quassapaug pond, Israel Curtise's lot of mowing meadow land, the 
lane by Eliphalet Bristol's running to Lt. Samuel Wheeler's, the saw 
mill on Hop brook, and a large rock with a number of pine trees on 
it east of Ebenezer Richardson's. Ebenezer Porter was left out of 
the limits. Three years before this time a similar petition had 
been denied. To that of 1757 were appended thirty-three names, 
which names are here given: 

Isaac Bronson, Ebenezer Smith, Thomas Mallery, 

Isaac Bronson, Junior, Arah Ward, James Burges, 

Josiah Bronson, Japhet Benham,* Ebenezer pender.f 

Stephen Miles, Edward Smith, Daniel Mallery, 



* [James ?] + Ebenezer Porter. 



WA TERB URT'S LA TER TEA RS A S A COL ONLA L TO WN. 399 

Nathan ? John Scott, Stephen Abbott, 

Daniel Tyler, Reuben Hale, [Dr.] Peter Powers, 

Gideon Mallery, Noah C and e, Nathaniel Richardson, 

Benjamin Bristol, Daniel Hawkins, Abner Munson, 

worn away — John Weed, Amos Scott, 

Ezekiel Tuttle, Andrew Weed, Samuel Sherman, 

Japhet Benham, Jun.,* James Bronson, Thomas Masters. 

All but seven of the above names were within the bounds of Waterbury. 

The good Deacon Thomas Clark was yearly chosen town clerk 
as long- as he lived; when Deacon Timothy Judd f was not chosen 
moderator of the great town meeting in December, Thomas 
Matthews or Caleb Humaston received the honor; Deacon Clark 
was town treasurer until 1760, when Mr. Joseph Hopkins was 
chosen to the othce, which he held until 1764. 

In 1755 "an act had been passed for licensing and regulating- 
Retailers and for granting and collecting an Excise on Distilled 
vSpirituous liquors." Accordingly, in 1756 a new officer was added 
to the town list — Jonathan Baldwin, Jr. was chosen "Collector of 
Excise." According to this act, any person desiring to retail any 
rum, brandy, or other distilled spirituoiis liquor was required to 
obtain an annual license from an assistant or justice of the peace in 
his own town, under a bond to the officer of twenty pounds, for 
which he was to pay one shilling and sixpence. To the collector 
of excise, the retailer was to render an account, upon oath, of all 
the lic[Uors he had on hand at his taking the license, and all that he 
received during the year, and pay the excise thereon, subtracting 
one-fifth part for leakage and wastage. Four pence per gallon was 
to be paid to the excise collector for all liquors sold in quantity 
less than thirty gallons. A retailer could not sell less than one 
quart — although a tavern-keeper might under certain restrictions. 
The revenue under this act was for the benefit of schools. 
Occasionally, and chiefly because of town-line disputes, a town 
agent was appointed for the year — Captain Samuel Hikcox being 
so appointed "to represent the town in any action that might be 
brought against it at any court of justice whatsoever." Thomas 
Matthews, Captain Stephen Upson, Captain George Nichols and 
others were so chosen in subsecjuent years. In October, 1762, 
Joseph Adkins [Atkins] living in present Wolcott, with others, 
petitioned for the privilege of hiring preaching among themselves 
five months in the winter season, carefully setting forth the limits 
of the territory to be covered by the permission. 



* [James Jr. ?] + Timothy Judd was a captain, a deacon, and sometimes a "preacher." 



^QQ HI8T0BT OF WATERBURY. 

It began on the first long lots in Farniington on the nKiuntain next to Water- 
bury, and ran westerly three miles by the south end of the society of New 
Cambridge, and to where Cambridge comes into the society of Northbury two 
miles to a birch tree at the north end of a ledge of rocks in Stephen Blakslee's lot, 
about sixty rods east of his house, then south two degrees east four miles to a 
white oak tree marked, thence south twelve degrees east one mile and seven rods 
to a bunch of cherry trees by the west side of the Mad river, thence south two 
degrees east about half a mile into a line drawn west from Farniington southwest 
corner, thence east a mile and three quarters to said corner, from thence in Farni- 
ington line until it comes to the east side of the original twenty rod highway 
across the long lots in Farniington, thence northerly straight to the top edge of the 
mountain west of Phineas Barns' house, thence on the height of said mountain to 
the first mentioned place. 

The above petition included " liberty of setting" up a school " and 
freedom from ministerial rates during the five months. The 
Assembly granted the petition in its every part, also yielding them 
liberty to tax themselves for the support of the ministry and 
school, as societies by law had power to do. The next May, the 
First Society presented before the Assembly its side of the 
question, setting forth the fact that within the above limits lived 
all the inhabitants in the northeast qttarter, except two or three 
families — that their " meeting house was thrown from the centre 
into an extreme part of the society, giving a dangerous aspect and 
tending to their destruction."* 

Among the events of the period were the following: Grove street 
was narrowed two feet near its west end for one hitndred feet; a 
premium of three shillings was offered for killing or destroying 
any grown wild cat or fox — provided that the animal was killed 
within the bounds of the town — the selectman to cut off the right 
ear of the cat or the fox to prevent any other selectman from 
giving an order for the same animal; this premium soon rose to 
five shillings, and later was but one shilling; the selectmen were 
given power to abate town rates on the application of any four 
persons — at their discretion; it was in 1761 that Abraham Hikcox 
and Stephen Upson, Jr., laid before the town the following notable 
memorial: "Whereas it hath been conjectured that the river from 
Waterbury to Derby might with a little cost be made Navigable for 
Battooing, we pray that this meeting would Grant that whoever 
shall subscribe and work at clearing said River, shall for each day's 
work be allowed to have it go off for a Highway day"; in 1763 it 
was voted that the Town Rate might be received by the collectors 
in provisions— wheat at four shillings, rye two shillings and eight 



* Dr. Bronson has entered so fully into the details of the formation of the ecclesiastical societies of 
Farmingbury and Middlebury, that it has not been deemed necessary to repeat them here. 



WATERBURY'S LATER YEARS AS A COLONIAL TOWN. 401 

pence, Indian corn at two, oats at one shilling" a bushel, and flax at 
six-pence per pound — provided the payment of rates was made at a 
specified time; in the same year the old question of the ministerial 
lands and moneys came before the town again, and a committee 
was to search the records and report at an adjourned meeting" — 
adjourned for that purpose — but when the meeting was met, it 
decided only on the manner of impounding rams, and the annual 
premium for killing foxes and wild cats ; and when it was pro- 
posed to hear the report of the committee which had been 
appointed to search the records of the ministerial land and moneys 
dissension seems to have arisen. It is indicated by the words — the 
last penned in our records by the then town clerk — " Answered in 
the Negative voted to Dismiss the meeting." 

Nov. 12, 1764, died Deacon Thomas Clark — "Town Clerk and 
Treasurer" — a man of most excellent attainment and of valuable 
reputation, who had lived here as boy and man for more than sixty 
years.* Mr. Clark lived on the ground now occupied by the City 
Hall. Across the meeting house green lived the Rev. Mark Leaven- 
worth. Within a few months of the time of Mr. Clark's death, his 
third daughter, Hannah, was to be married to the Rev. wSolomon 
Mead of New Salem, New York. Wedding festivities were pre- 
pared for. The guests assembled to witness the marriage cere- 
monies, but the Reverend bridegroom did not arrive. A bridge in 
his journey of forty miles on horseback had been carried away, but 
of this the guests knew not. They waited until the unseemly hour 
of eleven at night, when they all went home. At half-past eleven 
Mr. Mead reached Waterbury. At New Salem every preparation 
had been made by his people to welcome their pastor's bride the 
next evening, and the tiresome journey of more than forty miles 
must be begun early in the morning. A messenger aroused Mr. 
Leavenworth, and a midnight marriage took place. Very early the 
next morning the bride took her departure, the same horse carrying- 
Mr. and Mrs. Mead, the wedding apparel of the bride being securely 
strapped to the pillion. 

Ezra Bronson was chosen town clerk and town treasurer a month 
after Deacon Clark's death. At this meeting it required eighty- 
two officers to fill the town's quota, two or more offices frequently 
being represented by the same person. It is interesting to note 

♦Thomas Clark was also a merchant, and the book in which he kept his "accounts," commencing in 
1727, Dr. Bronson tells us was loaned to him by Mrs. Aurelia Clark, Deacon Clark's granddaughter. Dr. 
Bronson deposited it for security with the New Haven Colony Historical Society. He very courteously 
gave to the writer an order for its recovery, that it might add to the interest of this work. A most patient 
and earnest search for it in the Society's rooms in the late State House and in the Insurance Building, and 
also in its new home, has been without reward. 

26 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

that the Proprietors are still holding the balance of power — more 
than one-half of the places being filled by their lineal representa- 
tives. Unfamiliar names, in the unfamiliar characters of Ezra 
Bronson's pen look up at us from the open page. The Culvers and 
Dunbars and Frisbies; Eliphalet Hartshorn, Philemon Sanford, 
Isaac vSpencer, and Randal Evans have come into office; and young 
William Southmayd, grandson of the Reverend John Southmayd (a 
few months married to Irene, the daughter of the Rev. Samuel 
Todd) we find surveying highways. 

Mr. Jonathan Fulford branded the horses; Aaron Harrison, 
Richard vSe5anore, and David Blakslee sealed the leather, Isaac 
Prichard still repacked the provisions, in which the people paid 
their colony rates; Captain Stephen Upson, Jr., sealed the measures; 
eio'ht men were required to make the tax lists; thirty, to survey 
the highways; and, so unruly had Waterbury and its dependencies 
become, that fourteen tithingmen were deemed none too many to 
keep order in the community, and to properly attend to the observ- 
ance of the Sabbath Day according to the established law, in a town 
of four parishes, three meeting houses, and one church edifice. 

On the last day in the year 1764, the town instructed Capt. 
George Nichols and Capt. Stephen Upson, Jr., "to go out Eastward 
near Joseph Atkins to view and purchase half an acre of land upon 
the Town cost in that neighborhood where they shall think it most 
convenient for a burying yard." They selected the land now used 
for that purpose near Wolcott centre. 

In May, 1765, at the age of sixty-three years. Captain Samuel 
Hikcox died. He was an efficient and a prom.inent citizen, holding 
an important place in the community. 

The authority of the First Church was publicly laid aside in 
1765. For nearly a century the governing power had there inhered. 
The words of its dethronement were few — a simple announcement 
in town meeting declaring that "no regard should be paid to 
society nominations for Town Officers." However, a century of 
impetus is not soon overcome, and the same men, in so far as we 
may discern, were duly elected under the new regime — Captain 
Ezra Bronson was chosen town clerk and town treasurer ; the 
selectmen were "Capt. Stephen Upson, Jun'', Joseph Hopkins, Esq'', 
Capt. John^Sutliff, Capt. Edward Scovifl, Timothy Judd, Esq'; and 
Lieut. Daniel Potter." 

Upon the termination of the French and Indian war the English 
government began to devise ways and means to recover from her 
English colonies in America that portion of the cost of the conflict 
which the colonies had received from England in part payment for 



WATERBURT'S LATER TEARS AS A COLONIAL TOWN. 



403 



their colonial expenditures. To this end were devised certain 
stamp duties, which gave to the bill of particulars its popular title — 
"The Stamp Act." The full title of the bill was: 

An Act for granting and applying certain Stamp Duties and other Duties in the 
British Colonies and Plantations in America, towards defraying the Expenses of 
defending, protecting, and securing the same, and for amending such parts of the 
several Acts of Parliament relating to the trade and revenues of the said Colonies 
and Plantations, as direct the manner of determining and recovering the penalties 
and forfeitures therein mentioned. Also ten publick bills and seventeen private 
ones. 

It is not the province of this simple narrative of the early years 
of a colonial town, to enter into circumstantial details of the causes 
that led to the Colonial Revolution — and we may only refer to the 
general gloom and discontent that crept down upon the people, as 
they found themselves deprived of their constitutional rights as 
British subjects, by having taxes imposed upon them without their 
own consent — the colonies having no representation m Parliament. 
The colonists claimed that liberty and freedom were taken from 
them, being involved in the above power. In October, 1764, the 
General Assembly, convened at New Haven, resolved to petition 
Parliament against this bill for a stamp duty, or any bill for an 
internal tax on the colony — which resolve was carried into execu- 
tion. Mr. Joseph Hopkins and Mr. Ephraim Warner were the dep- 
uties from Waterbury who voted on this petition. One year from 
that time a Congress was held in New York, composed of the 
several governments, " to confer upon a general and united humble, 
loyal and dutiful representation to his Majesty and the Parliament, 
of the present circumstances of the Colonies, and the difficulties to 
which they were and must be reduced by the operation of the acts 
for levying duties and taxes on the Colonies, and to implore relief. 
One of the instructions to the members of this first Congress must 
be noted, because of its true Connecticut ring: /// your proceedings 
you are to take care that you form no such junction 7oith the other Com- 
missioners as will subject you to the major vote of the Commissioners present. 
One feels like giving a cheer for Connecticut Colony in 1765! 

And all this time while the government was aroused and in 
action for its constitutional rights of representation, and privilege 
of trial by jury; and expressing in every conceivable way its distress 
and alarming apprehensions that the English parliament ''should 
entertain sentiments so different from its own, respecting what was 
ever reckoned among the most important and essential rights of 
Englishmen," Waterbury continued her planting and harvesting, 
her living and dying, only now and then giving a word here, and a 



,oi HISTORY OF WATEEBURT. 

line there, whereby we may faintly discern the paths in which her 
people were led. There are no records for town meetings in the 
year 1766. The missing leaf was probably lost in re-binding. It 
may have been that it is because of these missing pages that Water- 
bury's action on the reception of the following news is unknown. 
Certain " rate books " found in the Kingsbury house were enclosed 
in newspaper covers. One of the covers is a newspaper, of a single 
issue, printed at New Haven on Monday morning. May 19, 1766, 
bearing for its title: Glorious News. At eleven o'clock on Friday, 
May 1 6th, there arrived at Boston a brig belonging to John Han- 
cock, Captain Shubael Coffin, in " 6 Weeks and 2 Days from Lon- 
don." Mr. Jonathan Lowder set off to bear the news the brig brought 
and "rode very hard," reaching New London at 9 o'clock .Saturday 
night, and waiting, without doubt, until sundown on the Sabbath 
day before taking up his journey to New Haven, where he arrived 
on Monday morning. And this was the news, from the London 
Gazette, of March i8th, 1766: "This day His Majesty came to the 
House of Peers, and being in his royal robes seated on the Throne 
with the usual solemnity, Sir Francis Molineux, Gentleman Usher 
of the Black Rod, was sent with a Message from his Majesty to the 
House of Commons, commanding their attendance in the House of 
Peers. The Commons having come thither, His Majesty was 
pleased to give his Royal Assent to An Act to Repeal an Act made 
in the last Session of Parliament. When the King went to the 
House of Peers, there was such a vast concourse of People, huzza- 
ing, and clapping hands, that it was several hours before His 
Majesty reached the House. As soon as the Royal Assent was 
affixed to the Repeal of the Stamp-Act, the merchants trading to 
America dispatched a vessel which had been waiting, to put into 
the first port on the Continent with the news. The greatest rejoic- 
ings possible by all Ranks of People were held in London, the ships 
in the river displayed their colors. Illuminations and bonfires 
abounded, and the Rejoicings were as great as ever was Known on 
any occasion." In Boston, it "was impossible to express the Joy 
the Town was in on receiving the above great, glorious, and impor- 
tant news." The bells in all the Churches were set a-ringing, and 
a day for general rejoicing was to be held. An hour after Mr. 
Lowder reached New London, the guns in the fort were firing, and 
New Haven on Monday morning, was in like rejoicings. No paper 
it is safe to say was ever more welcome in Waterbury than was this 
issue of "Glorious News." We do not know who brought it here 
or how long the rider lingered at Stephen Hopkin's gate to tell the 
tidings, or who held him fast at Judd's Meadow until the story was 



WATEBBURT'S LATER TEARS AS A COLONIAL TOWN. 405 

retold, but we do know that four days later, on Friday, a special 
Thanksgiving- day was held throughout the colony. The rejoicings 
at Hartford were not only religiously observed, but bells and colors 
and cannon played their parts, and "preparations were making for a 
general illumination in the evening, when, accidentally, fire was 
communicated to a cpiantity of powder put in one of the lower 
rooms of the new brick school house (which stood where the Ameri- 
can Hall is now, 1881,) to be delivered out to the military and used 
on the joyful occasion. In an instant the building was reduced to 
a heap of rubbish. A number of young gentlemen had met to make 
sky rockets in the chamber over the room where the powder was 
deposited. About thirty were buried in the ruins, of whom six died." 

A few days after this Thanksgiving was held, Joseph Hopkins 
of Waterbury asked the Assembly for ''£,z^ 4 ^}i, or any part 
thereof, because Isaac Frazier, a transient person, broke open his 
shop (on the north side of West Main street) in the night, between 
the 5th and 6th days of October, 1765, and stole and carried away a 
large quantity of goldsmith's wares, with some monies." Mr. Hop- 
kins pursued the thief with men and horses, and found him at South 
Kingston in Rhode Island. He was returned to Waterbury, and 
committed to prison at New Haven at the above cost. Dr. Bronson 
tells us that Frazier "was sentenced to be executed, but asked for 
perpetual imprisonment, banishment or slavery instead, and that 
the request was not granted." We confess to a sense of relief at 
finding Dr. Bronson in probable error. According to Mr. Hopkins' 
plea, he was convicted before the ^Superior court, and punished — 
but as, after the punishment., he was bound to Mr. Hopkins for the 
payment of the sums expended in his capture, "but continued in 
service but four days and then absconded;" and, several years later, 
as one Isaac Frazier was "a prisoner in Fairfield county, for a cap- 
ital crime," we have ventured to infer that Isaac Frazier was not 
executed for stealing Joseph Hopkins's goldsmith wares in Water- 
bury. 

A committee to remove encroachments from highways had for 
some time been an almost annual appointment, but in 1768 the same 
committee was impowered "by the majority of its members to lease 
for a reasonable rent during the pleasure of the Town, such parts 
of the highways as might reasonably be spared." In the same year 
the selectmen were bidden to allow the cost of building a room, 
eight feet long and six wide, for the use of keeping the Town stock 
(guns and ammunition), to any person who should build the same. 

When England, at the close of the war with France in 1763, dis- 
persed the helpless Acadians and they were doomed to service in 



4o6 



mSTOJRY OF WATERBURY. 



the English colonies, six of the number were allotted to Waterbury. 
Special provision was made by Connecticut for the transfer from 
town to town of these most helpless mortals. In this year, the 
following act in our records is supposed to refer to a family of 
French Acadians : "Voted, to give the French Family in this town, 
in order to Transport sd. French Family into the Northward 
country, not exceeding Ten pounds, including- Charitable Contribu- 
tions." It is supposed that they were landed, as were our soldiers 
in the Cape Breton expedition, at New London, and were then 
passed on from town to town to their appointed destination. 

In May of 1768, "the proposal of a New county being erected in 
Woodbury " came before the town. This county was to include 
Woodbury, Waterbury, New Milford, Newtown, and New Fairfield. 
Waterbury 's vote on the question was passed in the negative. 

During sixty-seven years the inhabitants at Judd's meadow had, 
however rough the roads, or bitter the wintry winds, toiled upward 
to the Meeting-House green at the Town spot to attend divine 
service. In January, 1769, a modest petition for "priviledges" from 
Gideon " Hecox " and others of Waterbury, reached the Assembly. 
There is about that petition a pitiable little pathos, a half-guilty 
something, that is indefinable but potent to tell that Judd's meadow 
men felt their position to be that of an erring child. I suspect it 
was because they had so often joined in denying winter and society 
privileges to their own townsmen, that they were half ashamed to 
ask for themselves. Judd's meadow or South Farms is not even 
mentioned in the plea. The usual five-months' term of release was 
granted during the pleasure of the Assembly. In the same year 
Samuel Scott was collector of the colony tax. He became insolvent 
and conveyed his estate to the town as security for his collections. 
The town ordered his estate sold at a " Publick Vandue" at the 
dwelling house of the second Thomas Clark. In 1769 there were 
three Baptists in Waterbury. They are so noted in the rate-book 
for that year — their names being James Blakslee, Jacob Richmond, 
and David Cole. This was the same year in which Joseph Meacham, 
a Baptist minister, was prosecuted " at the suit of the king before 
the county court of Hartford, for solemnizing a marriage between 
Frances Baxter and Abigail Saxton." His punishment was a fine 
of twenty pounds, and six pounds cost, in lawful money. On prov- 
ing his innocence of intended evil-doing, his fine was forgiven him, 
but not the costs. 

In 1770 the old question of the disposition of the school moneys 
which had been received by the town from the colony — funds which 
had arisen from the sale of the seven townships — came anew to the 



WATERBURY'S LATER TEARS AS A COLONIAL TOWN. 



407 



front. The sales had taken place at a time when there was but one 
head in the township, and that head was the First church. West- 
bury and Northbury had already claimed their proportion according- 
to their lists in 1732. Of the money arising" from the Proprietor's 
gift, in 1715, of a ;^i5o right in lands, the sale of which was to be 
used for the support of the ministry, the Church of England now 
claimed its equal proportion, and the town agreed that from 1770 
the above money should be divided according to the claims of the 
various parties, and that the societies or parts of societies that 
should thereafter be formed should share in a like privilege. Cap- 
tain Samuel Hikcox (son of Deacon Thomas), Captain John Welton, 
and Captain Phineas Royce were chosen to go to the Secretary's 
office and search into the affairs relative to the matter, a?id to draw 
orders and give receipts relative thereto. The above vote very naturally 
was more than distasteful, and it was believed to be " against the 
common sense and practice of mankind." Party strife entered into 
the struggle. It was the Town of Waterbury vs. The First Church 
and Society. From the latter emanated most vigorous protests. 
That of the vSocieties' committee of the First Society ran thus : 

Whereas the town of Waterbury formerly (when consisting- of but one ecclesias- 
tical society) was possessed of certain large quantities of lands devoted to the use 
of the ministry in the same. And whereas, since the sd town has been divided 
into several ecclesiastical societies, the inhabitants of sd societies convened in a 
town meeting did formerly undertake by their votes to sell part of the sd lands, and 
to divide the interest of the moneys raised thereby to and amongst sd societies — 
And now the said inhabitants have also voted that a certain party called the church 
of England, (which had no existence in sd town when sd lands was granted to the 
use of the ministry therein,) shall have their equal proportion of s'^ moneys, all 
which votes are an affringement on the property of the first society of sd Water- 
bury and contrary to the laws of this Colony Therefore we the subscribers, 

society's committee in sd first society, do enter this our protest more especially 
against the last of the above sd votes made this day, as it is also against law and 
equity and the most important rites and interest of this society and against the 
common sence and practice of mankind, and request the same may be recorded in 
the office of the town clerk in sd Waterbury. Dated March 12, 1770. 

(Signed) Andrew Bronson, Joseph Hopkins, Ashbel Porter, Dan. Welton, Ezra 
Bronson, society's committee of the first society of Waterbury. 

On the same page the School committee of the First Society 
caused its protest to be recorded: 

Whereas the Hon'''"- General Assembly of this Colony, in the year 1733, Granted 
certain moneys raised by the vSale of the Western [lands] (then so called) to the 
First society in Waterbury for the use of the schools in sd First society forever— 
And Whereas on this Day the Inhabitants of the several societies in a Town meet- 
ing have taken upon them to vote, and have voted that the said moneys shall be 
Divided to the several societies in Waterbury contrary to the laws of this colony 



4o8 



mSTORT OF WATERBURY. 



Therefore we the subscribers school committees (intimating two schools as then 
existing at the town centre) in the First society Do Enter this our Protest against 
said vote as being unlawful unquitable and Injurious to Posterity, and Request 
that the same may be Recorded in the office of the Town Clerk in said Waterbury. 

Dated this 12th Day of March, A. D. 1770. 
Also Mr. Isaac Bronson Protested against sd. vote and Desired the same might 

be entered. 

Jonathan Baldwin, 

Isaac Bronson, Ju". 

Ezra Bronson, 

Reuben Blakslee, 

ScJiool Committee of the First Society of IVaterluiry. 
[The meeting Dismist.] 

The First Church, without doubt, felt grieved and defrauded of 
that which had been its inheritance. Its power and its riches had 
joined hands and were fleeing away from it. A similar hour enters 
every human heart in its earthly course. 

The next town meeting opened with " Prayer by the Rev'd 
Mark Leavenworth." It would seem that it was only on momentous 
occasions (born of sorrow or some weighty consideration), that the 
civil meetings of the community were fortified by prayer, before the 
year 1770. 

In October 1770, the Society of Farmingbury was duly incorpo- 
rated on lines somewhat less in extent than those over which 
winter privileges had held sway. The society line passed through 
the middle of the dwelling houses of Caleb Barnes and Elijah 
Frisbie. After a series of mistakes in regard to the center of West- 
bury Society, the site for the second meeting house was finally deter- 
mined. The stake " was set about half a mile north of the old meeting 
house, on the west side of the highway from the old meeting house 
to Benjamin Richards Junr., in Wait Scott's orchard, about seven- 
teen or eighteen rods southwest from Wait Scott's dwelling house, 
and about fifteen or sixteen rods west from the highway." The 
stake, set by " Bushnel Bostwick, Abijah Catlin, and John Whiting 
Esq'^ was to be included within the sills of the house." 

In May 1771, the First Society asked the General Assembly for 
the return of the moneys that had been taken from it, but obtained 
no redress. In the same year the selectmen were appointed "to go 
and view and find a convenient place for a Burying Place in the 
west part of the First society." The site selected was the first 
place of burial in Middlebury. 



CHAPTER XXXII. 

THE RESOLUTIONS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THE EARLIEST 

INTIMATION OF AN APPROACHING WAR A COMMITTEE OF IN- 
SPECTION WATERBURY RESOLVES TO ABIDE BY THE ASSOCIATION 

ENTERED INTO BY CONGRESS MASSACHUSETTS BOYCOTTS THE 

IMPORTERS OF BRITISH GOODS BOSTON RIOTING THE BOSTON 

PORT-BILL WINDHAM'S GIFT OF SHEEP THIRTEEN GENTLEMEN 

IN WATERBURY RECEIVE CONTRIBUTIONS FOR BOSTON WATER- 

BURY'S MILITARY COMPANIES 1770-1775 POPULATION IN 1774 

CHURCHMEN AN ARMY OF SIX THOUSAND MEN IN APRIL, 1775 

WATERBURY SENT 152 SOLDIERS CAPT. PHINEAS PORTEr's COM- 
PANY DISAFFECTION AT NORTHBURY THE REV. JOHN R. MAR- 
SHALL CAPT. BROWN STEPHEN UPSON A " RUMPUS " IN WATER- 

BURY^THE REV. MR. INGLIS — DR. MANSFIELD THE REV. JAMES 

SCOVILL BENJAMIN BALDWIN BIRTH OF THE NATION AT PHILA- 
DELPHIA GENERAL HOWE'S BRITISH FLEET GENERAL WASHING- 
TON'S APPEAL FOR CONNECTICUT MILITIA WATERBURY TROOPS 

REACH NEW YORK THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE READ 

STATUE OF KING GEORGE OVERTHROWN MAJOR PHINEAS POR- 

TEr's ORDERLY BOOK WATERBURY MEN IN MANY PLACES. 

IN May, 1774, the House of Representatives, under solemn and 
serious conditions, passed eleven resolutions, which, after 
having been in the Lov^^er House read distinctly three several 
times and considered, were voted and passed with great unanimity. 
In the ist resolution, his Majesty King George is acknowledged 
to be the lawful and rightful King of Great Britain, and the duty is 
admitted of the people of his kingdom, including the Colony of 
Connecticut, to bear faithful and true allegiance to their king and to 
defend hiin in all attempts upon his person, crown or dignity; in 
the 2d, the colonists laid claim to all the liberties and privileges of 
natural born subjects, as fully as though they had been born within 
the realm of England, claiming property in their own estate, and 
the right to be taxed by their own consent only, given in person or 
by their representatives, that their liberties or free customs were 
not to be taken from them, and that they were not to be sentenced or 
condemned but by the lawful judgment of their peers, all of which 
they claimed by their charter; in the 3d, that the only lawful repre- 
sentatives of the freemen were the persons elected by them to serve 



4IO HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

in the General Assembly; in the 4th, the right to be governed by 
their General Assembly in the article of taxing and internal police 
was set forth, with the claim that the same had been enjoyed more 
than a century under the charter which had neither been forfeited 
nor surrendered, but had during all the century been constantly 
recognized by King and Parliament; in the 5th, the Assembly pro- 
tested against the erection of new Courts of Admiralty vested with 
powers above and not subject to the coinmon-law courts of the 
Colony to determine suits relating to duties and forfeitures, as 
being foreign to the established jurisdiction of the former courts of 
admiralty in America on the ground that it was " destructive of 
one of their most darling rights, that of Tryal by Juries," which 
was held in esteem as one chief excellence of the British consti- 
tution, and a principal bulwark of English liberty; in the 6th, pro- 
test was made against the apprehending and carrying persons 
beyond the sea to be tried for any crime committed within the 
Colony, or trial by any court constituted by act of Parliament or 
otherwise within the Colony in a summary way, without a jury; m 
the 7th, declaration was made that any harbor or port duly consti- 
tuted and opened could not be shut up and discharged except by an 
act of the legislature, without subverting the rights, and destroy- 
ing the property of subjects; in the 8th, the act of Parliament 
inflicting pains and penalties on the town of Boston by blocking 
up its harbor was a precedent justly alarming to the colonists and 
inconsistent with their constitutional rights and liberties; in the 
9th, the Colony promised that whenever his Majesty's service 
should require the aid of her people, most cheerfully to grant its 
proportion of men and money for the defense, protection and 
security of the British American dominions; in the loth, it was 
set forth that according to the extent and circumstances of the 
American Colonies, there were within them as many loyal, virtu- 
ous, industrious and well-governed subjects as in an}^ part of the 
British dominions, that they were as warmly engaged to promote 
the best good and real glory of the grand whole of the Empire as 
any subjects within it, and that the colonists looked upon their 
connection with Great Britain (under God) as the greatest security 
to the colony, which connection they ardently wished might con- 
tinue to the latest posterity, declaring that the Constitution of the 
Colony of Connecticut as understood and practiced upon ever since 
it existed until the late troubles intervened, was the surest band 
of union, confidence and mutual prosperity between the mother 
country and her colonies, and the best foundation on which to build 
the good of the whole, whether considered in a civil, military or 



WATERBUBT IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 411 

mercantile light; in the nth, acknowledgment was made of the 
duty owed by the colony, to king, country, themselves and their 
posterity to maintain, defend and preserve their rights and liber- 
ties, and to transmit them entire and inviolate to the latest gene- 
rations, and announcing a fixed, determined and unalterable resolu- 
tion faithfully to discharge that duty. 

When Capt. Jonathan Baldwin, and Joseph Hopkins, Esq., 
unflinchingly declared their unbounded patriotism by subscribing 
in behalf of Waterbury to the resolutions, of which the above is a 
mere outline, they had been twelve times deputies to the General 
Assembly. 

The earliest intimation of an approaching war to be found in 
our record appears Nov. 17, 1774, when a meeting was warned to 
take action on the " nth Article of the Association of the General 
Congress." The above "Article" recommended that every town 
should appoint a committee whose business it should be attentively 
to observe the conduct of all persons touching that Association of 
the General Congress, and if any one was found inimical to it 
the case was to be published in the Gazette — "to the end that 
all such foes to the rights of British America might be publicly 
known and universally contemned as the enemies of American lib- 
erty." Thereafter, all dealings with such persons were to be broken 
off. The town at once appointed its Committee of Inspection. 
The men chosen on this important occasion were Joseph Hop- 
kins, Dr. Ebenezer Beardsley, Deacon Andrew Bronson, and James 
Bronson from the First society; Capt. John Welton from the 
Chtirch of England in the First society; Capt. Gideon Hotchkiss 
and John Lewis from Salem; Deacon Timothy Judd, Capt. Benjamin 
Richards (who kept a tavern) and Stephen Matthews from West- 
bury; Dr. Roger Conant, Jesse Curtis (one of seventeen Curtis 
men) and Nathaniel Barnes from Northbury; and Josiah Rogers 
from Farmingbur}'. 

The people in town meeting assembled, agreed and resolved 
faithfully to adhere to, and strictly to abide by the association 
entered into by said Congress — and the above committee were to 
see the same carried into execution in every article thereof. The 
town clerk was instructed to get a copy of the doings of the Con- 
gress, well bound, at the cost of the town, and lodge it in his office, 
there to remain among the records of the town for the use of future 
generations. If it should be decided to hold a County congress, 
the committee already appointed was to choose two out of their 
number to attend such congress. Thus Waterbury valiantly 
pledged herself, and entered with no uncertain voice into the dark 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

Dec. 22, 1774, a second meeting was held, at which an order was 
given for a new and larger building in which to store the Town 
stock and to increase the stock to double the amount hitherto held. 
This increase was in response to a colonial order and must have 
equalled 300 pounds of powder, 1200 pounds of bullets, and 1800 
flints to meet the requirements at that date. 

Notwithstanding the absence of written evidence, we may not 
for a moment believe that the war did not begin in Waterbury in 
1770, as well as elsewhere. Nearly all the maritime towns on the 
continent could not, at that date, have entered into an agreement 
not to import British goods, a few necessary articles excepted, until 
the Act of Parliament imposing certain duties on tea, glass, paper, 
painters' colors, oil and other articles, was repealed; the Massachu- 
setts towns could not have been "boycotting" in 1770 in the most 
fundamental manner the merchants who imported British goods, 
neither buying themselves, nor suffering any one acting for them 
to buy, and saying : " Neither will we buy of those that shall buy 
or exchange any articles of Goods with them," and voting : " That to 
the End the Generations which are yet unborn may know who they 
were that laughed at the Distresses and Calamities of this people, 
and instead of striving to save their Country when in imminent 
Danger, did strive to render ineffectual a virtuous and commendable 
Plan," and ordering that " the names of the Importers should be 
annually read in Town meeting" — could these things have been, and 
this remote town felt no thrill of patriotism ? Are we to suppose 
that the story of Griffin's wharf; the cargoes of the brig Beaver, the 
ships Eleanor and Dartmouth; the meeting in Faneuil Hall to 
determine ways and means of getting rid of the cargoes of the three 
obnoxious Indiamen; the adjournment to the Soiith Church; Josiah 
Quincy's speech; Governor Hutchinson's refusal to send away the 
ships; the return of the committee about sundown to the church 
with the report of his refusal; the rush of the sixty-five men to the 
harbor, the dock, the ships, the tea — that all this rioting on the i6th 
day of December, 1773, in the face of an English fleet and English 
soldiers in the castle, had not been told and borne fruit that fell 
upon some luckless trader in forbidden luxuries in Waterbury 
before 1774? 

The Boston Port bill went into operation the first day of June, 
1774. By its terms no person was permitted to land anything at 
Boston, or at Charlestown. In Boston harbor on Noddle's, Hog, 
Snake, Deer, Apple, Bird and vSpectacle islands were many sheep 
and cattle, likewise hay and wood, all of which the inhabitants of 
Boston needed for daily use— and the Port bill denied them. It was 



WATERS UEF IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 413 

a desperate situation — the neck of Charlestown reached out to the 
north for food and help, and the neck of Boston pleaded with the 
south for assistance, and by the twenty-fourth day of June the cry 
had reached Windham, Connecticut. On that day nine gentlemen 
of that town met at their meeting-house door to go forth and 
gather food in answer to that cry. In three days they collected 257 
sheep which were driven to Roxbury, there to await an opportu- 
nity to get them into Boston. A letter accompanied the gift, in 
which letter the givers begged the men of Boston to suffer and be 
strong remembering zuhat had been done for the country by its founders., and 
closing with the words : " We know you suffer, and feel for you. 
As a testimony of our commiseration for your misfortunes, we have 
procured a small flock of sheep, which at this season are not so good 
as we could wish, but are the best we had. This small present, gen- 
tlemen, we beg you would accept and apply to the relief of those 
honest, industrious poor, who are most oppressed by the late 
oppressive acts." 

It was November 22, 1774, that in Waterbury a committee of 
thirteen men was appointed to receive donations contributed towards 
the relief of the poor in Boston. Col. Jonathan Baldwin (this was a 
few days after he received his commission as lieutenant-colonel of 
the loth regiment of militia) and Joseph Hopkins of the meeting 
house, Captain John Welton, Esq'., and Stephen Welton of the 
Church of England received for the centre— James Porter for the 
Hop Swamp region— Captain Samuel Hikcox and Timothy Judd, 
Esq., for Westbury — Stephen Seymour, Randal Evans and David 
Smith for Northbury — Josiah Rogers for Farmingbury — Samuel 
Lewis, Esq., and John Hopkins for Salem. We are denied the 
pleasure of knowing what was sent to Boston from Waterbury as 
the result of the ingathering of the above gentlemen. 

In order to obtain a glimpse of Waterbury's position in the 
militia of the colony at the beginning of the war we must review 
her military record for a few years. 

In 1770 Waterbury's military officers and companies were: In 
the First society, three companies — in Westbury, two (called the 
East and the West company) — in Northbury, two — in Farmingbur}^ 
one — making eight military companies in the township. The 
officers of the first of the three companies in the First society were 
Capt. Ezra Bronson, Lieut. Ashbel Porter, Ens. Stephen Miles— of 
the second, Capt. Abraham Hikcox, Lieut. Hezekiah Brown, Ens. 
Joseph Warner— of the third, Capt. John Lewis, Lieut. Samuel 
Porter, Ens. Amos Osborn. Of the West company in Westbury the 
officers were Capt. Abel Woodward, Lieut. Peter Welton, Ens. 



^j_^ HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Thomas Cole. The other Westbury company— having been the 
second in the township in the date of its formation, continued to be 
called the vSecond VVaterbury compan)^ — its officers in 1770 were 
Capt. Samuel Hikcox, Lieut. Richard Seymour, Ens. Samuel Brown. 
In Northbury, the First company was commanded by Capt. Randal 
Evans, Lieut. Bartholomew Pond — the Second company's officers 
were Capt. David Blakesly, Lieut. Eliphalet Hartshorn, Ensjude 
Blakesly. Of the " newly erected company in the winter parish of 
Waterbury, so called," or Farmingbury, Josiah Rogers was lieu- 
tenant and John Alcock ensign. In 177 1, Thomas Cole was captain 
and Benjamin Richards lieutenant of the West company in West- 
burv. Samuel Curtis was lieutenant, Nathaniel Barnes, ensign 
in the First company of Northbury. In 1772, Phineas Porter was 
ensign in the First company of Waterbury. Samuel Brown was 
lieutenant, Michael Dayton, ensign in the Second company. 
Samuel Porter was captain, Thomas Kincaid, lieutenant, in the 
Third company. In 1773, no changes were made. In 1774, all the 
companies of Waterbury belonged in the loth regiment, of which 
Jonathan Baldwin was lieutenant-colonel (in the room of Elisha 
Hall gone to Great Britain). In October of that year the First com- 
pany of Waterbury, Capt. Phineas Porter, Lieut. Reuben Blakslee, 
Ens. Isaac Bronson, Jr., became the 2d company of that regiment. 
The Second Waterbury company, Capt. Hezekiah Brown, Lieut. 
Isaac Benham, Ens. Ephraim Warner (all Church of England men), 
became the 12th company. A Northbury company, Capt. Michael 
Dayton, Lieut. Stephen Matthews, Ens. Thomas Fenn, became the 
7th company; a second Northbury company, Capt. Nathaniel 
Barnes, Lieut. Lazarus Ives, Ens. James Warner became the loth 
company; a third Northbury company, Capt. Benjamin Richards, 
Ens. Nathaniel Edwards, became the 13th company, and a fourth 
Northbury company appears — Capt. Amos Bronson, Ens. Samuel 
Scovill (both of the Church of England), forming the 14th company. 
In March, 1775, Moses Foot of the Northbury parish, with other 
inhabitants, informed the Assembly that they had with great care 
and expense applied themselves to the use of arms and the art of 
war, and prayed to be constituted a military company. In April, 
1775, (the next month), Joseph Garnsey of the Westbury parish 
appeared with the same request. The Assembly made answer by 
commissioning Capt. Jesse Curtiss, Lieut. Moses Foot, Ens. Roger 
Conant, officers of the Northbury company, which became the i8th 
company; and by commissioning Capt. Joseph Garnsey, Lieut. 
Jonathan Roberts, Ens. Benjamin Richards officers of the Westbury 
company, which became the 19th company. At the same time 



WATERBURY IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 



415 



Capt. John Lewis, Lieut. Ira Bebee, Ens. Israel Terril, of Salem 
parish, were commissioned officers over that company, which 
became the 15th company — all in the loth regiment. 

According to the census of Connecticut colony in 1774 Water- 
bury had 3526 inhabitants. There were 1228 children under ten 
years, 609 girls, 619 boys — 807 young persons between ten and 
twenty, of whom 427 were males, 380 females; of this number nine- 
teen young women were married, and five young men — of 1407 
between twenty and seventy, 700 were men, 707 women; of this 
number 132 men and 138 women were unmarried — 21 women and 6 
men were over seventy and unmarried — there were 34 negroes, 13 
under twenty. Of Indians, but 4 remained, 3 under twenty — one, a 
woman over twenty. 

We can add that Waterbury's tax-paying population in 1774 
consisted of about 750 persons — a very few of whom were women. 
These were scattered through the ancient town in the following 
manner: 221 belonged at the centre, 212 in present Watertown, 181 
in present Plymouth and Thomaston, 46 in present Wolcott, and 91 
in present Naugatuck, including the settlers in present Prospect, 
The Middlebury settlers were included in Waterbury centre. These 
were again divided by their church relations in the following 
manner: Of the First society's 221 tax -payers, 140 were numbered 
as First-society men, 79 as Church of England men. In Watertown, 
Mr. Trumbull's people of the Established Church were 165, Church 
of England, 47. In Plymouth, 144 went to Mr. Storrs' meeting 
house, 37 to the English Church. In the Salem or Naugatuck 
parish, 82 were meeting-house people, 9 were churchmen. In 
Farmingbury society or Wolcott, 38 belonged to the Established 
Church, 8 to the Church of England. Taking the township as a 
whole, we find 571 men paying taxes who belonged to the Estab- 
lished Church, and 180 to the Church of England, or, about one man 
in four whose loyalty to King George was anchored within the deep 
waters of his more or less religious nature. The temptations which 
the churchmen experienced to ignore many things that the non- 
churchmen felt to be treasonable in their very nature, are clearly 
seen to-day. More earnest men were probably never held to duty 
on the earth, then these whigs and tories — men that were grown out 
of the same conditions of life and habit, men whose ancestors side by 
side had lived and died. The story, although it has been breathed 
from lip to lip for more than a century, and dropped in innumer- 
able words from a thousand pens, will forever remain untold. 

It is difficult to make an estimate for the young men of the town 
who were old enough for military duty, but not for tax-paying, but. 



(j HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 

including all available material, we think there may have been not 
far from one thousand men in the township. It is not proposed 
to follow the militia companies through the war, but a list has been 
made of the men who joined the forces for campaign purposes, and 
of certain of the officers who served on the field, by which we are 
able to show that Waterbury's place is very near, if not at the head 
of the line of towns, and that her number of men is in full pro- 
portion to her officers — whereas it has disparagingly been said 
that her "men were all officers." In January, 1775, there were 
nine militia companies of 540 men. 

In April, 1775, it was ordered that one-fourth part of the militia 
in the colony should be enlisted, equipped and assembled for the 
special defense and safety of the colony. The premium was fifty- 
two shillings and one month's advanced pay. Every man provided 
his own blanket, knapsack and clothing, and was allowed ten shill- 
ings for his own "arms, a good bayonet, and cartouch box." The 
colony required 3000 stand of arms and announced that all that 
should be made and completed by the first day of July would be 
purchased by the colony at a reasonable price. Waterbury went 
forth about this time to the Mad river, where she built a " gun 
factory " and probably made guns for her country. 

An army of 6000 men was raised and divided into six regiments 
of ten companies each, 100 men to a company. In the ist regiment, 
Phineas Porter was captain, Stephen Matthews ist lieut., Isaac 
Bronson, Jr., 2d lieut., David Smith, ens. of the 8th company. Jesse 
Curtiss was 2d lieut. and Nathaniel Edwards,* ens. in the 5th com- 
pan}^ James Blakesley was 2d lieut. in the ist company, and pro- 
moted to be ist lieut. in the 9th company. Aaron Foot, "sometimes 
of Waterbury, sometimes of Litchfield," was 2d lieut. in the 4th 
company. In the 2d regiment, Ezekiel Scott was commissioned ist 
lieut. in April, and within a month was promoted to be captain of 
the 2d company. 

In 1775 Waterbury was the twelfth town in point of wealth in 
the colony. New Haven, with her ;^72,5i5, stood first. Farmington 
stood second with ^71,582. Waterbury had ^41,243, less than ^^5000 
more than half the wealth of New Haven or Farmington. The 
additions have not been estimated. The returns of the number of 
soldiers sent in from fifty-five of the seventy towns in 1775 are 
determined in this manner. The poll-tax of a soldier, ^18, was 
abated. Waterbury claimed an abatement on ^2736 for 152 men 
sent to the war. Farmington sent 157 men. New Haven 152 — 

* The Nathan Edwards of the Colonial Records. 



WATERBURY IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 



417 



Farming-ton (our mother) the most loyal town in the colon}- ! Her 
eldest child, Waterbury, second only to that mother of all the towns 
in the commonwealth in the first year of the war ! 

Dr. Bronson tells tis that Capt. Phineas Porter's company was to 
be raised in Waterbury; that it was in readiness and about to march 
late in May, 1775; that its term of service was not to exceed seven 
months. According to the " Record of ^Service of Connecticut Men 
in the War of the Revolution," issued from the Adjutant General's 
Office in Hartford in 1889, the enlistment roll of this company is 
missing. The names of thirty men belonging- to it are given, as 
discharged from service in the Northern Department — all but four 
of them in November. The first man on the list is John Woodruff 
of Mr. Trumble's flock in Westbury. The second man is given as 
Jonah Hall, who was from Salem parish, and whose perfect name 
was Jonathan Hall. His name on our tax-list is Jonah Hall. 
Stephen Hotchkiss of the First church was the third man; Zadock 
Ciirtiss of Northbury the fourth. 

The 5th company in the same regiment (the ist) must also 
have been recruited from Waterbury, if not /;/ Waterbury. Its ist 
and 2d lieutenants, Jesse Curtiss and Nathaniel Edwards; its ser- 
geants, Aaron Matthews and Stephen Scott; its clerk, Eli Curtis; 
its corporals, Edward Dunbar and Amos Hikcox; its fifer, Giles 
Dunbar; its drummer, Joel Judd; beside fifty-one of its centinels, 
or privates, were Waterbury "men. Their names are : 



Elijah Weed, 
">Ezekiel Sanford, 
Lyman Curtiss, 
David Foot, 
Timothy Pond. 
Elisha Street, 
Josiah Barns, 
Epenetus Buckingham, 
John Doolittle, 
Josiah Edwards, 
David Foot, Jr., 
Consider Hicox, 
Joseph Hotchkiss, 
Daniel Judd, 
Freeman Judd, 
Demas Judd, 
Thomas Merchant, 
Gershom Scott, /' 



Daniel Seymour, 
John Eggleston, 
Allyn Judd, 
Amos Matthews, 
Elisha Parker, 
Solomon Trumbull, 
Isaac Barnes, 
Amos Dunbar, 
James Fancher, 
Solomon Griggs, 
Joash Seymour, 
Rufus Farrington (Yar 

rington ? ) 

John Fulford, 

' Woolsey Scott, 

Joseph Lewis, 

Stephen Judd, ^ 



Isaac Pendleton, 
Israel Williams, 
Obed Williams, 
Bartholomew Williams, 
]\Iichael Dayton,' 
Luman Luddington, — • 
Nathaniel Merrils, 
Solomon Way, 
Titus Fulford, 
Elisha Hicox, 
Joseph Pribble, 
Samuel Barnes, 
Archibald Blakeslee, 
Elijah Smith, 
James Thomas, 
Benjamin Warner, 
Bronson Foot. 



The above men served from May to December, 1775, and were 
at the siege of Boston. 



j^ HISTORY OF WATEBBUBY. 

Northbury was somewhat turbulent from the beginning-. The 
earliest sicrns of disaffection came from that section. John Sutliff, 
Jr. and other men who were members of the West company in that 
parish, in April 1775 informed the General Assembly that "the 
major part of the company, both officers and soldiers were totally 
disaffected to the general cause of American liberty, and altogether 
refused to adopt the measures advised by the Continental Congress, 
but were accustomed to speak and act in direct opposition thereto." 
Capt. Amos Bronson and Ensign Samuel Scovill were " cashiered 
and dismissed from their military offices." The colonel of the regi- 
ment was ordered "to lead the com^Dany to the choice of a captain 
and ensign and other needful officers." In October, " on informa- 
tion of the state, circumstances and doings" of that company, it 
was "dissolved," and all persons by law obliged to do military duty 
were annexed to the companies under the command of Capt. Jesse 
Curtiss and Capt. Nathaniel Barns. 

At the same date, "John R. Marshall of Woodbury, missionary, 
was cited to appear before the court and answer for his inimical 
temper and unfriendly disposition toward the plans adopted for 
the defence of the American people." This is the first instance in 
which a clergyman was called before the court for hostility to the 
American cause. On the same day, certain inhabitants of Water- 
bury presented a memorial, in which they advised the court that 
Capt. Hezekiah Brown was disaffected to the method advised by 
the Continental Congress, and that he said in the presence of a 
number of people " that the Congress ought to be punished for 
putting the country to so much cost and charge, for they did no 
more good than a parcel of squaws; that it was unnecessary expense, 
and the Assembly had no right to do it; that Boston had wrongfully 
inidertaken to quarrel about the tea, and we had no hand in it; that 
our General Assembly was as arbitrary as the pope of Rome, when 
it cashiered Capt. Bronson and Ensign Scovill; and that he would 
not go one step further for the relief of people in Boston than he 
was obliged to go." Definite action on both the cases cited seemed 
to await the enactment of laws touching this new crime in the com- 
munity. The laws came two months later, forbidding any person 
within the colony to supply the Ministerial army or navy with pro- 
visions, military, or naval stores; prohibiting the giving of any 
manner of intelligence; the enlisting or procuring any enlistments 
into the service of that army or navy; the taking up of arms against 
the Colony of Connecticut or the United Colonies; the piloting of 
any vessel, or the giving of any manner of aid or assistance — the 
penalty for offense in any of the above particulars being the forfei- 



WATERS URT IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 419 

ture of estate and imprisonment for a term not exceeding three 
years. And, to cover cases like Hezekiah Brown's, any person who 
should libel or defame any of the resolves of the Honorable Con- 
gress of the United Colonies, or the acts or proceedings of the Gen- 
eral Assembly made for the defense or security of the rights or 
privileges of the people, should, on proper conviction, be disarmed 
and not allowed to have or keep any arms, or to hold or serve in 
any office, civil or military, and should be punished by fine, impris- 
onment or disfranchisement, or find surety for peace and good 
behavior and pay the cost of prosecution. On complaint made to 
the Civil Authority and Committee of Inspection of any person 
as inimical to the liberties of the Colony, that person was to be 
examined touching his innocence of the accusation, and if not 
proved innocent, he was not to be allowed to have or keep any 
arms. Any person held or screened under the protection of the 
Ministerial army or navy, or assisting to carry into execution meas- 
ures against America, and having real estates, such estates were to 
be attached and held under the care of appointed persons, and 
improved for the use of the Colony. The Treasurer of the Colony 
held the power to sell such estates by auction, or at private sale. 

After the passage of the above act, Capt. Hezekiah Brown, "of 
the 12th military company in the loth regiment" was, after trial, 
found guilty of disobedience, cashiered, and rendered incapable of 
holding any further military office in the colony. The town, how- 
ever, had relieved him from office in 1774, at the same meeting in 
which the "very jumbled and unintelligible" vote was rescinded, 
by which the Church of England had been receiving for four years 
its proportion of interest money derived from lands devoted to the 
ministry by the town proprietors of 1715. Hezekiah Brown was a 
man of about fifty years, the son of Deacon Samuel Brown, who 
came to Waterbury from "Boston, Hartford County" (and not, I 
think, related to James Brown). Dr. Bronson tells us that he left 
Waterbury early in 1777 and joined the Ministerial army in New 
York, received a captain's commission and died among his new 
friends, August 27, 1777. His wife, a daughter of Lieut. Prindle, 
who had eight children to care for, probably remained loyal to the 
colony, for the real estate belonging to her husband was restored 
to her. 

Six letters, yellowed by time and worn with the touch of a 
mother's fingers, are all that remain to tell the story of the fourth 
Stephen Upson in lineal descent from the planter Stephen. From 
them we learn that he, a lad of seventeen years, indentured to a 
master with whom he- was not happy, ran away, (we infer to Litch- 



420 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

field) and there enlisted July 12, 1775, in Capt. Nathaniel Tattle's 
company, in the 7th regiment. The first letter, bearing date Sep- 
tember 15th, is written from New London. In it he tells his mother 
that the soldiers have little to do with tories at New London; that 
the troops are throwing up fortifications, but that he is living with 
the Lieutenant in a house where there is a family; that he lies on 
as good a bed as he did at his master's, and lives as well and feels 
better; that he would not go home for anything. It is a boy's 
letter with an ache in his heart that he stifles to the last and then 
betrays by telling her that he "has written one letter to her but 
has had no answer from her, or any letter from any body, and 
hopes that she will not slite him so much as not to write to him." 
The second letter is from "Camp at Cambridge, Nov. 5th, 1775, and 
is written to relieve his mother's anxiety regarding him. He 
assures her that it is a time of general health in the camp, adding: 
"We are all of good spirits and not afraid of a Cannon. About 
swearing, there is some, but not more than can be expected of so 
many saylors as there are here." He again assures his mother that 
he is more contented than he should be at home at his master's, and 
that he shall return to her as soon as his time is out. On Christmas 
day he wrote again from Camp Winter Hill, at Charlestown, that 
he had enlisted again, five days after his time was expired, for a 
year, and that his pay was to be 44 shillings a month, adding: "I 
should not have enlisted had it not been that I thought my Country 
was in more Need of me here than at home, but I hope to come 
home and see you on furlough soon, and to meet with your good 
affection at my coming home, and your approbation in my engage- 
ment in the army. Our provisions ai'e good and plenty, and bar- 
racks are comfortable, considering all things." The third letter is 
of but eight lines, written from Roxbury, March 15, 1776. His regi- 
ment, he informs her, had that day received orders to march — 
adding, "I suppose to New York. Uncle Clark has been to the 
Colonel to get liberty for me to go through Waterbury, but cannot." 
In May he wrote from New York: "I am determined not to go to 
live at my master's any more. If you can get up my indenture I 
[would] have you do it. If you can get it up, I will not enlist 
again, but come home and live with you — if you cant " — the remain- 
der of the letter is gone. There is yet another letter written from 
New York on his birth-day. It is dated Sept. 12, 1776. In it he 
writes: "We expect the enemy to make another push very soon. I 
mean to stay here till my time is out. I shall not enlist again 
before I come home, for I mean to come home and live with you if 
my life is spared so long. I would not have you conserned about 



WATERBURY IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 421 

me, but keep up a good spirit, for in time I hope we shall drive 
our Enemy off from Our land and have peaceful times again. This 
day I am Eighteen years of age. Whether ever I shall see another 
birth-day or no I cant tell. God knows. Remember my love to 
Mark and Daniel (his brothers), and to my sisters and to all my 
friends. Pray write to me as often as you can." The letter closes 
with the usual " Your loving son Stephen Upson." The boy folded 
it — addressed it "To the Widow Sarah Upson at Waterbury in Con- 
necticut," omitting from the lower left hand corner the usual — "To 
be left at Landlord Clarks." Three days later, "at the battle of 
Harlem Heights," Stephen Upson was killed. 

By whatever name known, whether royalist or rebel, whether 
Whig or Tory, the grief of the widow of Hezekiah Brown and the 
grief of the widow and the mother of vStephen Upson was one 
and the same. It was the same story, repeated in Waterbury 
from Northbury's remotest bound to Salem's southern limit; from 
the borders of Quassapaug's waters to the summit of Benson's hill 
and to East mountain — a story of mingled patriotism, loftiest 
courage, heroic endeavor and patient endurance, born out of 
the sufferings of heroic ancestors, whose vanishing faces were 
still luminqus with the light of that Liberty toward which the 
children of 1776 were marching. Side by side with these ardent 
lovers of inherited and chartered rights — in their town, in their 
homes, in their very lives were inwoven the lives of other men, 
who were actuated by what they believed to be their duty to 
king and country — a duty which they honestly pursued through a 
pathway of suffering. Dr. Bronson has written of these men: 
" They had reasons satisfactory to themselves for their opinion and 
conduct. They wished the success of the British government, 
because on that success depended their hopes of worldly distitiction 
and religious privilege. On that, they supposed they must rely for 
the permanent ascendency of the Episcopal church in America, its 
doctrine, its faith and its worship. To England they were bound 
by the strongest ties. From that country their parish clergymen 
had from the first received a great part of their support. They 
owed it a debt of gratitude, which, if they could not repay, they 
were unwilling to forget. . . . They thought, with some show of 
reason, that resistance would be in vain, and that the rebels would 
soon be compelled to return to duty. It is impossible, thought they, 
for the American Revolutionists, without money or discipline, ill 
furnished with arms and not perfectly united among themselves, 
to resist for a long time the whole force of the British empire. 
And there were others, wise men, that entertained the same views." 



^22 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

He also tells us that ''so great was the alienation of feeling, that 
parents could not always agree to send their children to the same 
school," and that in 1775 a vote was passed dividing the school dis- 
trict on the Farmington and Wallingford road into two— one for 
the " Presbyterians " and one for "the Church of England;" that, 
"when, at one period, thick gloom had settled over the prospects of 
the colonists and the church party felt almost sure of a speedy 
triumph, some of the more enthusiastic of the party met together 
and determined in what manner the farms of their opponents should 
be divided among themselves, after the subjugation of the 
country;" that "in Westbury the windows of the Episcopal church 
were demolished, the principal members of that church were not 
allowed to attend public worship, but were confined to their farms." 

We are indebted to Dr. Timothy Hosmer of Farmington, for the 
following picture of life in Waterbury at this time. It is contained 
in a letter written by him to his friend Ensign Amos Wadsworth, 
on July 30, 1775,* and relates to an old red house that is still stand- 
ing about two miles from Waterbury centre, on the north side of 
the Middlebury road, and on the lower end of Gaylord's hill. I 
think, but do not know, that this house was built about 1750, by 
James Nichols, the founder of The Park. It is generally accred- 
ited, however, to Capt. George Nichols, and the tradition still 
lives that two days were spent in raising the large frame, that an 
ox was roasted, and that unusual festivities attended the occasion. 

The house was sold in 1760 by Capt. George Nichols to his son 
Lemuel, who "kept tavern" there during the war and it was the 
scene of the events narrated in the letter from which the following 
is taken: " There hath been a terrible rumpus at Waterbury with 
the tories there. Capt. Nichols' son, Josiah, enlisted under Capt. 
Porter in Gen. Wooster's regiment, went down to New York with 
the regiment, tarried a short time and deserted . . . came home 
and kept a little under cover, but goes down to Saybrook and there 
enlisted with Capt. Shipman . . . got his bounty and rushed off 
again. Capt. vShipman came up after him . . . and went with 
some people they had got to assist them to Lemuel Nichols' where 
they supposed he was. Lemuel forbade their coming in, and pre- 
sented a sword and told them it was death to the first that offered 
to enter, but one young man seized the sword by the blade and 
wrenched it out of his hands. They bound him and made a search 
through the house, but could find nothing of Josiah. The Tories 
all mustered to defend him, and finally got Lemuel from them 

* Mr. Julius Gay, of Farmington, gives this letter in his " Historical Address on Farmington in the War 
of the Revolution," 1893. 



WATEBBURT IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 423 

and he and Josiah pushed out where they cannot be found. This 
ran through Thursday. The Whigs sent over to wSouthington 
for help, and the people almost all went from wSouthington on 
Friday. . . . They had near 100 Tories collected upon the 
occasion and were together until ten o'clock Friday night. They 
dispersed and there was nothing done to humble them." Dr. 
Hosmer also wrote that Capt. Nichols was carried before Esq. 
Hopkins who had him bound over to the County Court at New 
Haven. Local tradition tells another story — " that Lemuel Nichols 
was inclined to the King's side in his heart, but took the oath of 
Fidelity to the State. One day when a squad of Continental soldiers 
was passing along the Woodbury road, he standing in his door, and 
thinking himself secure in distance — the house being at that time 
more than a thousand feet north of the road — treated them with 
derision. The soldiers turned and fired into the house. After Lem- 
uel Nichols — Major Morris lived in the tavern; his son Miles when 
re-covering the house found three bullets which were supposed to 
have been fired into it by the soldiers when passing along the road. 
Dr. Hosmer was in error, in attributing to Capt. Nichols a son 
Josiah. It ma}^ have been his son Daniel or his son William who 
was the deserter. Tradition asserts that the house of Solomon 
Tompkins in Nichols' Park was the head-quarters of the Tories, but 
there was a Solomon Tompkins who was a Connecticut pensioner 
of the Revolution in good and regular standing, living in New 
York until 1823 and claiming to have been "born in or near Water- 
bury, Conn." and, as Lemuel Nichols took "the oath of Fidelity to 
the State " soon after the "terrible rumpus," and Samuel Scovill 
was not only active in forming a company on July 4th, 1776, but 
enlisted for the war in a Regiment of Artificers under Col. Jedu- 
than Baldwin of Mass. (which was authorized by Congress), we may 
believe that many persons who were at first inimical to the Sons of 
Liberty found cause for a change of heart and proved valiant 
defenders of the American cause. As early as 1776, the Rev. Mr. 
Inglis wrote to the " Society for the propagation of the Gospel in for- 
eign parts " that every one of the society's missionaries in New Jer- 
sey, New York and Connecticut had proved faithful, lo3^al servants, 
and had opposed to the utmost of their power the spirit of disaffec- 
tion and rebellion, and that the other clergy of the church, though 
not in the society's service, had observed the same line of conduct; 
that to officiate publicly and not pray for the king and royal family 
according to the liturgy, was against their duty and oath— and yet 
to use the prayers for the king and royal family would have drawn 
inevitable destruction upon them — the only course which they 



424 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

could pursue to avoid both evils, was to suspend the public exer- 
cises. Mr. Inglis also wrote that " Mr. Beach of Connecticut alone 
continued to officiate after Independence was declared, affirming 
that he would do his duty, preach and pray for the king till the 
rebels cut out his tongue." Mr. Beach deserved to own his own 
tongue, and I trust retained it whole and entire until he was able 
to admit that the rebels were not so black as he had painted 
them. The poor clergymen ! They were exempt, as clergymen, 
from bearing arms, but I infer that when they had placed them- 
selves out of active service by closing their churches, the civil 
government called upon them, as members of the colony, to bear 
arms; for Mr. Inglis testifies, "that clergymen were warned to 
appear at militia musters with their arms — that they were fined for 
not appearing, and then threatened with imprisonment for not pay- 
ing their fines." 

Good Dr. Mansfield of Derby made himself offensively active by 
writing to Gov. Tryon that if properly protected, several thousand 
men in the three western counties of Connecticut would join him. 
This letter was intercepted, and Dr. Bronson adds that Dr. Mans- 
field was obliged to flee for his life. The above letter was probably 
the occasion of the following: "On a Sunday morning while Dr. 
Mansfield was preaching, a guard of American troops marched into 
his church. The clergyman left his desk in haste and escaped to 
his home, fleeing from thence to the British on Long Island, leav- 
ing his wife and infant and seven other children to the care of 
others." Dr. Mansfield lived so long and lived so well in Derby 
that his venerable and commanding figure, his large white wig and 
his broad brimmed hat are still had in remembrance by a few of 
his neighbors, while his praise is in all the churches. Of Mr. 
wScovill's church m Waterbury Mr. Inglis wrote that " there was 
scarcely a single person found of his congregation but what had 
persevered steadfastly in his duty and loyalty." I think, however, 
that Mr. Inglis gave too bright a picture for his English society to 
gaze upon. I think our list of soldiers in the war will include more 
than "scarcely a single person from the Church of England in 
Waterbur}^" Dr. Bronson had the advantage of personal acquaint- 
ance in his youth with participants in the scenes presented during 
the war, and attributes the fact that Waterbury was to a mention- 
able extent free from scenes witnessed in some other towns, in part, 
to the prudence and wisdom of Mr. Scovill, of whom he says that: 
" He was sometimes threatened. Occasionally, he had reason to 
fear injury. In the more critical seasons, it is stated, he often slept 
from home in order to be out of the way of midnight calls — but he 



WATERS URT IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 



425 



had the courage, which the Whigs respected, to remain through 
the war." Dr. Bronson had evidently never heard of the scenes out- 
lined in Dr. Hosmcr's letter. 

While General Washington was still at Boston, in March of 1776, 
two regiments from Connecticut were at New York " employed in 
pulling down and carting away the north part of the Fort and 
erecting a Fashine Battery about eighteen rods north of it across 
the Broad Way to obtain a clear passage for retreat into the bat- 
tery, if repulsed by the enemy." A third Connecticut regiment 
was building entrenchments on Tower hill — a mile east of New 
York and in plain sight of it and of the Asia (man of war), which 
young Benjamin Baldwin of Waterbury informs his brother Jona- 
than (student at Yale college) has not as yet fired a gun at the 
workers on Tower hill, of which Benjamin was one. 

On the 4th of July, 1776, that event of events — the birth of 
the United vStates of America — had taken place at Philadelphia. 
Every man who signed his name as witness to the deed knew full 
well that unless the colonists could fight longer and stronger than 
Great Britain could do, that his signature would prove his own 
death warrant — and this was done while one hundred and thirty 
English ships were anchoring at their doors, and General Washing- 
ton was calling for the militia of Connecticut without loss of a 
moment's time to be sent to his aid at New York. Two days before 
the Nation was born, Governor Trumbull and his council of eight 
trusty men were met at Lebanon to hear the cry from twelve towns 
"pressing for powder" — under their apprehensions from Canada. 
Eight hundred pounds of gunpowder from Elderkin and Wales's 
mill, and one thousand pounds of lead from the furnace at Middle- 
town were allowed them — the powder at 5s. 4d. per pound, the lead 
at 6d.; it was ordered that the row-galley Shark should be paid for 
at a cost of ^861; twenty-five carpenters were sent to Crown Point 
to help build batteries under Gen. Schuyler; it was ordered that the 
lead on the water-wheel of Jonathan Kilburn's sawmill should not 
be taken from him for the use of the publick until actually wanted 
— and then to be taken b}^ the selectmen without further orders 
(and this suggests that Waterbury's selectmen may have gleaned 
the lead they gathered for the government from Waterbury's mills); 
other orders were issued, and officers appointed, and then the 
important event of the day came before the Council. 

It was the consideration of Gen. Washington's appeal for the 

VLi\\\i\& 7vithout one Jiwineiifs loss of time, seconded by "several letters 

from the Hon'''^ President of the Continental Congress " urging the 

ame thing "in strong and pressing terms." The battalion of 



426 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



militia ordered to be raised for the relief and support of the army 
at New York, "by inevitable difficulties of preparation," could not 
be made ready so as to arrive in New York " seasonably for the 
expected attack of the enemy." Should that be the case, it was 
feared that it "would prove fatal to the cause of American liberty." 
Believing that "in that critical situation no efforts could be too 
great," it was ordered that the three regiments of light horse 
lately established should set forward and march to New York 
to stay until the regiments appointed for that service should 
arrive. 

It was the 20th of June, 1776, that Capt. Phineas Porter of 
Waterbury was given a Major's commission on the staff of Col. 
Douglas' regiment in Gen. Wadsworth's brigade of State troops 
raised to reinforce Washington's army at New York. In less than 
three weeks this regiment in which so many Waterbury men 
enlisted was recruited and marched to New York. It reached that 
city on a most auspicious day. Our weary men were ushered into a 
great camp of many regiments under all the excitement of the 
knowledge that Gov. Howe was at that moment landing his forces 
on Staten Island. The hour was, as nearly as can be determined, 12 
o'clock at noon. The day was Tuesday, July 9, 1776. That evening, 
all the brigades in and around New York were ordered to their 
respective parade-grounds for a purpose — that purpose was that on 
each parade ground to each regiment might be read important news. 
Washington himself, on the spot near where stands the old City Hall, 
sat on horseback within the hollow square formed by a regiment, 
and with uncovered head and reverent mien listened to the read- 
ing by one of his aids of the Declaration of Independence. This 
was not done under the rosy flush of victory but in the fast- 
approaching shadow of mighty Britain, strong in all the power, 
and radiant with all the pomp of war. And what had a few little 
colonies to meet them with? They had, it is true a new name — 
that of States, but cannon and camp-kettles alike were wanting. 
The small powder mills in the Connecticut hive could yield them 
only a fragment of the powder General Washington had cried for, 
day and night, from Cambridge and from New York. The houses 
of the inhabitants, diligently searched for fragments of lead, gave 
not enough, and it is well known that every homestead in New 
England was besieged with demands for the last yard of homespun 
cloth, that the country's soldiers might not go coatless by day and 
tentless at night. Washington refrained from ordering the regi- 
ments to be uniformed, knowing full well that his order could not 
be effected. 



WATERBURY IN THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 427 

After the reading of the Declaration of Independence — after the 
grand parade at sunset— after the day was done, there came the 
same night a hasty march in which the Connecticut men were not 
too weary to join — a march that no commandant ordered, into 
Bowling Green. 

Only four years had passed since an equestrian statue had been 
borne by loyal subjects to a loyal Province. It was a noble horse, 
though formed of lead, that stood proudly on its pedestal, bearing 
the figure of King George. The Crown of Great Britain was on his 
head, a sword in his left hand, his right hand grasped the bridle 
lines, and over all a sheen of gold, for horse and king were gilded. 
King George faced the bay and looked vainly down on Staten 
Island, for his brave ships and his eight thousand soldiers on ship 
and shore could not save him from the sea of wrath surging in the 
hearts of the colonists at his feet. We all know the story of the 
overthrow of the statue, and of the bullets that were made from 
the lead of it in Litchfield — but Major Porter's orderly book reveals 
to us General Washington's reproof to the soldiers for the act: 

" The General doubts not the persons who pulled down and 
mutilated the statue in the Broadway last night were actuated by 
zeal in the Public cause, yet it has so much the appearance of riot 
and want of order in the army, that he disapproves the manner 
and directs that in future such things shall be avoided by the 
soldiers and be left to be executed by proper authorit}^" 

The same book mentions the brigades of Generals Heath, 
Spencer, Heard, Scott, Wadsworth, Mifflin, Putnam and Phillips, as 
being at and in the vicinity of New York — -also the regiments of 
Colonels Bayly, Mason, Baldwin, Parsons, McDougal, Learned, 
Douglas, Kitzema, Malcom, Parker (regiment of artificers), Ward, 
Huntington, Chester, Sage, Hardenburg, Reed, Prescott, Nixon, 
Marten, Ward, Mansfield and Van Cortland. 

The British soldiers in their gay uniforms, who had just arrived, 
must have furnished a sharp contrast to our soldiers in their non- 
descript attire. No wonder is it that on July 12th: "the General 
was very sorry to observe that many of the officers and a number 
of men instead of attending to their duty on the beating of the 
drum continued along the banks of the North river, gazing at the 
ships," remarking that "a weak curiosity makes a man look mean 
and contemptible." Nevertheless, the contrast must have been 
painful, even to General Washington. We quote from Major Por- 
ter's orderly book under date of July 24th : 

The General being sensible of the difficulty of providing cloth of almost any 
kind for the troops feels an unwillingness to recommend, much more to order any 
kind of uniforms, but as it is absolutely necessary that men should have clothes 



g HISTORY OF WATERS UBY. 

and appear decent and tight, he earnestly encourages the use of hunting shirts 
with long breeches of the same cloth made gaiter fashion about the legs to all 
those who are unprovided. No dress can be had cheaper or more convenient, as 
the wearer can be cool in warm weather and warm in cold weather by putting on 
underclothes which will not change the outward dress winter or summer, besides 
which it is a dress supposed to carry no small terror to the enemy, who think every 
such man a complete marksman. 

Meanwhile the Continental Congress had recommended the 
Assemblies of the United Colonies to procure clothing", and only 
five days after the Continental troops were reproved for "weak" 
ctiriosity along the banks of the North river, Connecticut had given 
forth the order for 3000 coats and 3000 waistcoats of homemade 
t-loth, — as far as might be of a brown or cloth color — for all the 
blankets that could be obtained in the colony, 3000 felt hats, 6000 
shirts of checked flannel, or linen, if flannel could not be had, and 
6000 pairs of shoes. These articles were proportioned to the coun- 
ties. But so dire was the need of the troops at Crown Point and 
Ticonderoga, that all that could be hastily gathered was sent on. 

So serious was the outlook at this time that stringent measures 
were adopted regarding prisoners of war. Hitherto they had not 
been confined, being allowed to go, within limits, on their own 
parole of honor. At this time an order went forth that no unknown 
persons, whether appearing in the character of gentlemen, expres- 
ses, travelers or common beggars, might pass from town to town, 
unless upon a certificate from Congress, Committee of wSafety or 
Inspection, or other prescribed officer. Such certificate must men- 
tion from whence and whither the traveler was passing and that he 
was friendly to the liberties of the American States. All officers, 
even to the tithingmen were required to stop and examine all 
unknown persons and to require a sight of the certificate the trav- 
eler carried, and unless full satisfaction was given on every point, 
the officer was to apprehend the person and take him before the civil 
authority or Committee of Inspection. Watches were kept in towns 
to apprehend unknown persons who might travel by night and 
practice mischief. 

During this eventful summer Waterbury had her special excite- 
ment when the militia companies of the township were ordered to 
New York. The British forces were augmented to such a degree 
that Washington called for home troops. August 17th, under Lieut. 
Col. Jonathan Baldwin, the loth regiment marched. All that 
remains in our state archives of the men who went on this service 
is the following list of names upon "an abstract of the marching 
money due the company in Lieut. Col. Baldwin's regiment com- 
manded by Lieut. Isaac Benham. 



WATERS URT IW THE WAR OF THE REVOLUTION. 429 

Sergeants Lemuel Nichols, * Stephen Welton, Daniel Bronson, 
Samuel Leavenworth, Aaron Benedict; Drummer Moses Cook; Coi- 
porals John vScovill, Amos Prichard; Privates John Adams, Elisha 
Benham, Moses Frost, Titus French, vSamuel Frost, Timothy Frost, 
Cyrus Gi-iTTey, "Joseph Hopkins, John Mercha~hf7 Samuel Mimson, 
Lue Smith, Jabez Tuttle, Benoni Welton." The only man not of 
Waterbury on the list is Titus French. 

There are in the writer's possession certain receipts and frag- 
ments of pay rolls once belonging to Col. Baldwin, from which we 
gather the following facts. The regiment was five days in going to 
New York, and four in returning; Capt. Stephen Yale's and 
Capt. Elisha HalVs men were in service forty-two days and were 
discharged September 25th; Youngloye Culler went, and was 
allowed "a sickness bill" of three pounds and two shillings; Capt. 
Jesse Moss received about fifty pounds " toward the sick bills 
allowed;" Capt. Elisha Hall received pay for "extraordinary sick- 
ness due to his complaint " — -Sergt. Joel Hall commanded Capt. 
Hall's company; Lieut. Joseph Newton gave a receipt for the 
"wages and mileage due to Lieut. Job. Yale, Jonas Hills, Lieut. 
Joseph Newton and Daniel Humiston for their services in the cam- 
paign to New York in 1776;" Gould Gift Norton gave a receipt for 
"his own and the services of Doc. Amos Hull in the Continental 
Army in August and wSeptember, 1776;" Benjamin Richards com- 
manded a company— there is but a fragment of its roll, but enough 
to give recognition to " Lot Osborn, Alsop Baldwin, Noah Richards 
and David Buckingham; twenty-four men went of Capt. Joseph 
Newton's company; Capt. Elisha Hall gave a receipt for the ser- 
vices of Sergt. Joel Hall, (taken prisoner later at Fort Washington); 
Lieut. Moses Foot gave a receipt for a compan}^ — eleven names only 
remaining of the roll— which are Joel Humiston, Moses Michel, Jesse 
Penlield, Ambross Potter, Amos Sanford, Jonah Sanford, John Sco- 
vill, Jesse Turner, Obed Williams and Giles Mingo; and the roll of 
Capt. Elisha Hall's company is receipted for by Oliver Stanley. 
Very many of the men in the militia regiments deserted, being 
unaccustomed to the rigors of service, but they nearly all returned 
to duty. With the above papers is the following : 

Waterbury i6th of Sep. A. D., 1777, then Received of Lieut. -Col. Jonathan 
Baldwin fourteen pounds four shillings lawful money in full for the Wages and 
Milage Due to those men who Deserted the Service Belonging to Cap. Nathaniel 
Barnes Company and my own in the months of August and Sep. last, and Returned 
to their Duty agreeable to His Excellency Governor Trumbull's proclamation. 

Received by Me, Jesse Curtis, Capt. 

* The Tory of 1775. 



HISTORY OF WATEEBURY. 

43° 

In reo-ard to these deserters, we learn that they were Lazarus 
Ives, Aaron Fenn, Benjamin Barnes, Cephas Ford, Paul Griggs and 
Elnathan Ives. They were at New York in August and in the loth 
company of the loth regiment. " By [medical] advice they 
absented themselves and returned home " — having served a month 
and traveled 224 miles. They petitioned the General Assembly for 
their "pay." Appended to the petition is the statement under date 
of September 5th of Dr. Roger Conant and Dr. Amos Hull that 
Lazarus Ives had dysentery and rheumatism. There is also the affi- 
davit of seven of their neighbors that the same men were unable to 
go to Horseneck in November. 

It is estimated that at this time Connecticut had fully twenty 
thousand men in the service, while her available force did not 
exceed twenty-three thousand. 

Waterbury men enlisted in six of the eight companies forming 
Col. Douglas's regiment, of which Phineas Porter was major. Every 
commissioned officer of its 4th company was from AVaterbury. 
They were Capt. John Lewis, Jr., ist Lieut. James Warner, 2d Lieut. 
Michael Bronson, Ens. Joseph Beach, Jr. There is no roll of its 
members, but seventeen names are given of those who received 
their discharge at a later date. Fifteen of the seventeen were from 
Waterbury. They are, Samiiel Scovill, Selah Scovill, Selden wSpen- 
cer, John Stewart, Abel Sutliff, John Tatterdon (doubtless Fallen- 
don), John Tucker, Jared Tirrel, Elihu Tirrel, Samuel Tuttle, 
Samuel Webb, Daniel Welton, Thomas Gould who was mortally 
wounded vSept. 15th, Titus Mix who was killed Sept. i6th, John 
Beach, a sergeant, missing Sept. 15th, vStephen Johnson who was 
killed at White Plains, Oct. 28th, and David Welton who was 
wounded Oct. 28th. 

The militia regiment of Col. Baldwin reached New York about 
two weeks before the battle of Long Island. In that battle, Major 
Porter's regiment, in which it will be remembered, Waterbury men 
fought in six of its eight companies, "was in the thickest of the 
fight." In the retreat from Long Island to New York, Major Porter 
is said to have been in the last boat which put off in the fog from 
the Brooklyn shore. This was about two months after his entrance 
into the Continental army as major of the 5th battalion of foot 
under Col. William Douglas.* 

* His military record is the following : May 1774, Lieutenant 2d Co. loth reg. of the Colony. Oct., 1774, 
captain of the same Co. April 1775 he entered the Colonial army as captain of the 8th Co. in the ist regi- 
ment. June 20th, he was major of the 5th battalion of foot, under Col. Douglas. The above appointments 
are from the Colonial records. Later he appears as major of his old militia regiment, the loth. In Jan. of 
1780 he became colonel of the same regiment, and, when the Waterbury companies at a later date formed 
an entire regiment, the 28th, he was appointed its colonel. 



WATERS URY IN THE WAR OF TEE REVOLUTION. 431 

About two weeks later, September 15th, an attack was made 
upon New York. The 5th battalion, under Col. Douglas, to which 
Major Porter belonged, and whose 4th company under Capt. Lewis 
was composed of Waterbury men, the muster roll of which is 
missing, was stationed at Kip's Bay. This was near Thirty-fourth 
street. The main body of the army was then at Harlem Heights. 
The British ships ascended the North and the East rivers, and 
their fires swept across the whole island, under cover of which, 
Howe landed near Kip's Bay. The troops fled panic-stricken. This 
was the occasion on which Washington is said to have become so 
excited that he threw his hat to the ground, exclaiming: "Are 
these the men with whom I am to defend America ? " At this 
moment, Washington, when " within eighty paces of the enemy and 
exposed to capture, was saved by his attendant who turned the 
head of his horse and hurried him from the field." It is pleasant 
to know that one Waterbury man — Major Phineas Porter — was 
between the enemy and the general, for in this retreat he was 
taken prisoner. He suffered nearly three months of hunger and 
imprisonment, during which time he parted with his knee buckles 
and other articles of value for food. Five men are recorded as 
missing after the retreat, in his regiment. 

David Smith, who ultimately was in command of all the militia 
of the State, was another Waterbury man, who at this time and 
later, was winning for himself and native town a good degree of 
respect. He entered service May ist, 1775, in the 4th company of 
the I St Continental regiment, as a private. He was next ensign in 
the 8th company. We find him captain in 1776 of a company in 
Col. Elmore's Continental regiment, which took the field in July, 
under Schuyler, and marched from Albany into Tryon county. 
Captain Smith's company was composed of seventy men, nearly all 
from IVaterbury. His ist lieutenant was Nehemiah Royce, and his 
ensign, William Andrews, both from Waterbury. This company 
served at "Burnetsfield (German Flats)." 

In Wadsworth's brigade was Capt. John Couch of Meriden, with 
Waterbury men in his company, and our Nathaniel Edwards for 
his ist lieutenant. This company was stationed during the 
summer of 1776 at Bergen Heights and Paulus Hook (Jersey city); 
in October, at Fort Lee; in November, sent across the river to assist 
in defending Fort Washington, where Lieutenant Edwards was 
taken prisoner. He did not reach home until November loth, 17 So. 
Soon after his captivity he had small-pox and asked for full pay for 
the time, which was granted. Ira Tompkins, Solomon Trumbull 
and David Hungerford, Waterbury men, and of his company, were 
taken prisoners at the same time. 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

In the same summer, in June, two State battalions, under Cols. 
Mott and Swift, were raised to reinforce the Continental troops in 
the northern department, then stationed at and in the vicinity of 
Fort Ticonderoga. The 4th company in Swift's regiment, serving 
under Gen. Gates, was commanded by Capt. Stephen Matthews, 
who reported eleven of his company killed. He seems to have gone 
to Ticonderoga a little after our poor army retreated from Canada 
—in the words of John Adams— "disgraced, defeated, discon- 
tented, dispirited, diseased, undisciplined, eaten up with vermin, 
no clothes, beds, blankets, nor medicines, and no victuals but salt 
pork and flour, and a scanty supply of that." 

Stephen Matthews' eleven men were probably of the ninety who 
were killed in the action on Lake Champlain in October, when the 
Americans lost eleven vessels. The names of ten of the above men 
are given by Captain Matthews, when he asks for redress for the 
arms once belonging to them — which he had saved, but which were 
afterward lost. He gives four as from Waterbury— " Job Welton, 
Elihu Robards, Jonathan Roberts and Dan Welton." Benajah Judd 
was also from Waterbury. The other names are James Warner 
and John Nichols "of New Haven," Hezekiah Clark, John Parker 
and Daniel Clapp. These men must have been among those drafted 
from the army, for the navy. 

After the battle of White Plains the loth militia regiment was 
again called out— "to place itself under General Wooster's com- 
mand on the Westchester border." In November four battalions of 
state troops were raised, to serve in Westchester, or in Rhode 
Island, in the 2d of which Captain Benjamin Richards, ist Lieut. 
Isaac Bronson, and Ens. Benjamin Fenn Jr., served. 

In December, so appalling was the situation that a very dark- 
ness of fear fell upon the American people. Connecticut's prisons 
were crowded with Tories; the term of service of the militia was 
expiring; some of the New York troops refused to serve, and it 
was feared that the people would " rise in arms and openly join the 
British forces;" Washington's little army, "not exceeding four 
thousand men," was encamped on a plain between the Hackensack 
and the Passaic rivers; Heath had a division in the Highlands, and 
Lee had a corps on the east side of the North river, and a British 
column, led by Cornwallis, was approaching Washington. Under 
the above circumstances, our General Assembly asked every able 
bodied man living west of the Connecticut river to go forward and 
offer himself for the service. 



CHAPTER XXXIII. 

A MORE PERMANENT ORGANIZATION OF THE ARMY REQUIRED JOSEPH 

HOPKINS' SERVICES MOSES DUNBAR: HIS "LAST SPEECH AND 

DYING words" SOLDIERS SUMMONED TO PEEKSKILL WATER- 
BURY OFFERS BOUNTIES THE DANBURY ALARM COL. BALDWIN'S 

PAPERS OUR MEN AT TICONDEROGA IN THE HIGHLANDS AT 

STILLWATER AND SARATOGA WATERBURY FURNISHES CLOTHING 

PROVIDES FOR SOLDIERS' FAMILIES VALLEY FORGE MONMOUTH 

MRS. ISAAC BOOTH LEWIS ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION. 

IN 1775 the enthusiasm of the colonists had made it an easy and 
a natural thing to raise an army, in a day — for a day. Material 
that came to hand had been accepted, and had marched away 
in haste — to meet the horrors of defeat and disaster. Eighteen 
months had passed since that gala day when half the men of Con- 
necticut colony called with proffers of assistance at Boston's doors 
— a year and a half, strewn with battles, assault and siege. Several 
thousand men had fallen in death and wounds on the field. Bunker 
Hill, Quebec, Long Island, Harlem Heights, White Plains and Tren- 
ton had written their gory texts on the hearts of the people — but 
an older text, written deeper even than battles could wa-ite, had 
been engraven by the God of Battles in the hearts of the colonists, 
urging them to still loftier endeavors. 

General Washington's experience w^ith men who enlisted for 
short terms, and with the hitherto untried militia regiments, had 
been disappointing. A more permanent organization was impera- 
tive. It was resolved to create a standing army, whose raembers 
should enlist for three years, or for the war. The}^ who enlisted for 
the war and served to the end were promised one hundred acres of 
land. Army life had lost its charms. Connecticut farms grew very 
attractive, when seen from the field of stern discipline and carnage. 
Volunteers for the new army did not press to the front. It was 
said that small pox " more effectually retarded the entering into the 
service than any other prospect of danger, or fear of the enemy." 
In Waterbury, it had at this time gotten beyond the control of the 
selectmen. 

During this period, Joseph Hopkins was active in the service of 
his country. With Capt. Samuel Forbes, he went to the lead mines 
in NeW' Canaan, examined the quality of the lead, and prepared a 
28 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 
434 

report for the Assembly (which is printed in American Archives); 
he received i8o votes for nomination for election, as Governor's 
Assistant; was appointed "to procure fire-arms and gun-locks to be 
made and' manufactured in the colony;" and he was at the head of a 
committee of five gentlemen who were " severally, or in conjunc- 
tion, to search after^ead mines, and report any discovery to the Gov- 
ernor," who was to report to the President of Congress. 

Waterbury furnished at this time a conspicuous martyr— who 
died, devoted to the Church of England. It seemed absolutely 
necessary to find a victim whose death should prove a powerful 
object lesson to the Tories, and to the political prisoners who filled 
the prisons. Moses Dunbar was the man selected. The tragedy 
and the pathos attending his dying will forever appeal to the heart 
of an American— be he the descendant of Whig or of Tory. While 
in prison and under sentence of death, Dunbar made an attempt to 
escape. Elisha Wadsworth was arrested, fined £40, and sentenced to 
one year's imprisonment for assisting him. Wadsworth, in his own 
defense, said that "he did not Assist him, but simply followed him 
out"— that Dunbar "effected his own escape as far as he went." 
Wadsworth was released from prison, Oct. 14, 1777, on paying costs 
and taking the Oath of Fidelity. 

About 1880, in the removal of an ancient house in Harwinton, 
the following document— containing the farewell words of Moses 
Dunbar to his children, and to this wojld — was found. 

The " Cause " must indeed have been a sacred one, that re- 
quired the sacrifice of the man, whose last words were the fol- 
lowing : 

My Children : Remember your Greater in the days of your youth. Learn your 
Creed, the Lord's prayer, and the ten commandments and Catechism, and go to 
church as often as you can, and prepare yourselves as soon as you are of a proper 
age, to worthily partake of the Lord's Supper. I charge you all, never to leave the 
Church. Read the Bible. Love the Saviour wherever you may be. 

I am now in Hartford jail condemned to death for high treason against the State 
of Connecticut. I was thirty years last June, the 14th. God bless you. Remem- 
ber your Father and Mother and be dutiful to your present Mother. 
(A true copy — written by Moses Dunbar). 

The last speech and dying words of Moses Dunbar, who was exe- 
cuted at Hartford ye 19th March, A. D., 1777, for high treason 
against the State of Connecticut. 

I was born at Wallingford in Connecticut the 14th of June, A. D. 1746, being 
the second of sixteen children, all born to my Father by one Mother. M}^ Father, 
John Dunbar, was born at Wallingford, and married Temperance Hall of the same 
place, about the year 1743. I was educated in the business of hvisbandry. About 
the year 1760, my father removed himself and family to Waterbury— where. May 



WATEBBURT IJ^ THE REVOLUTION. 



435 



ye 30th, 1764, I was married with Phebe Jearman of Farmington, by whom I had 
seven children — four of whom are now Uving. The hrst year of our marriage my 
wife and I, upon what we thought st:fificient and rational motives, declared our- 
selves for the Church of England — the Rev. Mr. Scovill being then missionary at 
Waterbury. May 20th, 1770, my honored Mother departed this life. She was a 
woman of much virtue and good reputation, whom I remember with the most 
honor and gratitude for the good care and affection she continually showed me. My 
joining myself to the church occasioned a sorrowful breach between my Father and 
myself, which was the cause of his never assisting me but very little in gaining a 
livelihood — likewise it caused him to treat me very harshly in many instances, for 
which I heartily forgive him, as well as my brothers, as I hope for pardon from my 
God and my Saviour for my own oifences. I likewise earnestly pray God to forgive 
them through Christ. 

From- the time that the present luihappy misunderstanding between Great 
Britain and the Colonies began, I freely coiifess I never could reconcile my opinion 
to the necessity or lawfulness of taking up arms against Great Britain. Having 
spoken somewhat freely on the subject, I was attacked by a mob of about forty 
men, very much abused, my life threatened and nearly taken away, by which mob 
I was obliged to sign a paper containing many falsehoods. May 20th, 1776, my 
wife deceased, in full hope of future happiness .... The winter preceding 
this trial had been a time of distress with us .... I had now concluded to 
live peaceable - and give no offence, neither byword nor deed. I had thought of 
entering into a voluntary confinement within the limits of mv farm, and making 
proposals of that nature, when I was carried before the Committee [of Inspection 
of Waterbury?] and by them ordered to suffer imprisonment during their pleasure, 
not exceeding five months. When I had remained there about fourteen days the 
authority of New Haven dismissed me. Finding my life uneasy, and as I had 
reason to apprehend, in great danger, I thought it my safest method to flee to Long- 
Island, which I accordingly did, but having a desire to see my friends and children, 
and being under engagement of marriage with her who is my wife — the banns of 
marriage having been before published — I returned, and was married. Having a 
mind to remove my wife and family to Long Island, as a place of safety, I went 
there the second time, to prepare matters accoi-dingly. When there, I accepted a 
captain's warrant for the King's service in Col. Fanning's reg't. I returned to 
Connecticut — when I was taken and betrayed by Joseph Smith, and was brought 
before the authority of Waterbury. They refused to have anything to do with the 
matter. I was carried before Justice Strong and Justice Whitman of Farmington, 
and by them committed to Hartford, where the Superior Court was then sitting. 
I was tried on Thursday, 23d of January, 1777, for High Treason against the State 
of Connecticut, by an act passed in October last — for enlisting men for General 
Howe, and for having a captain's commission for that purpose. I was adjudged 
guilty, and on the Saturday following was brought to the bar of the court and 
received sentence of death. The time of my suffering was afterward fixed to be 
the 19th day of March, 1777 — which tremendous and awful day now draws near, 
when I must appear before the Searcher of hearts to give an account of all the 
deeds done in the body, whether they be good or evil. I shall soon be delivered 
from all the pains and troubles of this wicked mortal state, and shall be answerable 
to All-Seeing God, who is infinitely just, and knoweth all things as they are. I am 
fully persuaded that I depart in a state of peace with God and my own conscience. 
I have but little doubt of niy future happiness, through the merits of Jesus Christ. 
I have sincerely repented of all my sins, examined my heart, prayed earnestlj^ to 



43^ 



HISTORY OF WATEBBUBT. 



God for mercy, for the gracious pardon of m)^ manifold and heinous sins, I resign 
myself wholly to the disposal of my Heavenly Father, submitting to His Divine 
will. From the bottom of my heart I forgive all enemies and earnestly pray God 

to forgive them all. Some part of Th S 's evidence was false, but I heartily 

forgive him, and likewise earnestly beg forgiveness of all persons whom I have 
injured or offended. Since my sentence I have been visited by sundry worthy 
ministers of the Gospel, who have discoursed and prayed with me— among whom 
are the Rev. William Short of Hartford. The Rev. Wni. Veils of Simsbury, my 
fellow prisoner on account of preaching in favor of the British government, has 
been indefatigable in affording every possible assistance to prej^are me for my 
terrible Exit. He administered the sacrament of the Lord's Supper to me the Sun- 
day before I was to be put to death. To these gentlemen, as well as all others 
who have shewed me kindness I give my most sincere thanks. I die in the pro- 
fession and communion of the Church of England. 

Of my political sentence I leave the readers of these lines to judge. Perhaps it 
is neither reasonable nor proper that I should declare them in my present situation. 
I cannot take the last farewell of my cotintrymen without desiring them to show 
kindness to my poor widow and children, not reflecting on them the manner of my 
death. Now I have given you a nari'ative of all things material concerning my 
life with that veracity which you are to expect from one who is going to leave the 
world and appear before the God of truth. My last advice to you is that you, 
above all others, confess your sins, and prepare yourselves, with God's assistance, 
for your future and Eternal state. You will all shortly be as near Eternity as I 
now am, and will view both worlds in the light which I do now view them. You 
will then view all worldly things to be but shadows and vapours and vanity of 
vanities, and the things of the Spiritual world to be of importance beyond all 
description. You will all then be sen.sible that the pleasures of a good conscience, 
and the happiness of the near prospect of Heaven, will outweigh all the pleasures 
and honours of this wicked world. 

God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, have mercy on me and 
receive my spirit. Amen, and Amen. 

Moses Dunbar, 
Hartford, March i8th, A. D., 1777. 
[A true copy by Sylvanus Cooke.] 

It is believed that Moses Dunbar was hung from a tree that 
stood on the hill, and on or near the site of the Trinity College 
buildings. It is said that Moses Dunbar's widow, when an aged 
woman, pointed out the tree to her -friends, saying: "That is the 
tree on which my poor first husband was hung." It is said that at 
the moment when the execution took place a white deer sprang 
from the near-by forest and passed directly under the hanging vic- 
tim. This tradition is pretty firmly established. Dr. Bronson tells 
us that "the gallows in a public place was kept standing for a long 
time as a warning to others." 

In January, 1777, John Slater, who was constable, took up six 
runaway Tories at Waterbury and guarded and transported them to 
Hartford, "by order of authority," receiving twenty-five pounds and 
fourteen shillings for his services. In February, two thousand men 



WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 437 

from Connecticut were summoned to Peekskill. The quota of the 
loth Regiment was 288 men, which made three full companies of 
ninety-six men each. Nehemiah Rice [Royce] was appointed ist 
lieutenant in Capt. David Smith's company in Chandler's regiment, 
and Lieut [Benjamin ?] Baldwin was transferred from that com- 
pany to Capt. [Jabez] Botsford's, in Col. Swift's battalion. Stephen 
Matthews was captain and Amos Hickox, Jr. lieutenant in the same 
battalion. Much of the service of the above battalion was in the 
Northern department. 

In April, 1777, the Governor and Council of Safety desired and 
requested the Connecticut towns to hold meetings for the purpose 
of considering what measures to take for raising soldiers for the 
Continental army. Waterbury held its meeting and engaged "to 
give each non-commissioned officer and soldier, to the number of 
one hundred and thirty-one, who should voluntarily enlist into 
either of the eight battalions then being raised in the State,* for the 
term of three years, or during the war, twelve pounds lawful money 
annually." Six pounds was to be paid on enlistment, or secured on 
demand, and six pounds at the end of every six months during ser- 
vice. To raise this amount, a fax of one shilling on the pound ivas laid, 
and it was to be collected within one month. A committee was appointed 
— any two members of it with full power to give security for the 
town to enlisting soldiers, and to draw money from the treasury for 
that purpose. Private donations had already been made to men 
who had "engaged in the standing army." To those who had 
received such donations and would give receipts to the town for 
such sums as had been received (which sums were to be credited 
upon the first six pounds due), it was promised that the twelve 
pound annual premium should be given. The moneys which had 
been contributed by individuals were to be credited to the con- 
tributors on the shilling-rate. Lest the shilling-rate should be 
oppressive to certain individuals, the selectmen were directed to 
make abatements of rates on such persons as were poor and ought 
to be abated. A number of the abated rate bills, under this act, 
remain. It must be remembered that this was the time when 
small-pox had gotten beyond the control of the selectmen. I do not 
know that any record remains of its work in the town centre, but we 
know that at Westbury, Mrs. Noah Richards, Mrs. Edward Scovil, 
Jr., young Abel Doolittle, Nathaniel Welton, young Montgomery [?] 
Pendleton, [Sarah Judd] the wife of Captain Benjamin Richards, 
Capt. Nathaniel Arnold, and Samuel, son to Lieut. Samuel Brown, 

*This is the first allusion to Connecticut, as a State, in the records. 



438 



HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 



all died from that disease between the 26th of March and the 19th 

of May, 1777. 

We have been compelled to ignore the great and stirring events 
of the war, and have made no mention of Washington's Christmas 
nio-ht crossing of the Delaware and his subsequent success in New 
Jersey — of his six-months' dictatorship that he might reorganize the 
army — of his proclamation commanding all persons who had taken 
the oath of allegiance to Great Britain "to deliver up their protec- 
tions and certificates and take the oath of allegiance to the United 
States." Full liberty was, at the same time, granted to all persons 
to withdraw themselves and families to the enemy's lines, but the 
edict had gone forth that any man found enlisting soldiers for a 
Tory regiment should, on conviction, be executed as a spy. It was 
the edict of General Washington, as dictator-general, under which 
Moses Dunbar was to remove his family to Long Island, and tinder 
which he was executed. 

This was also the period when " Dear Mother England " took 
to herself the confusion and shame and lasting infamy of treating 
helpless prisoners with atrocious inhumanities — beginning with 
Gen. Lee as her victim and continuing until her work culminated in 
suffocating fifteen hundred starving men, within a few weeks, in 
her prison-ships. Under the circumstances, there was nothing left 
for the United States but to avail itself of the law of retaliation. 
Accordingly, the prisoners who were abroad on parole, were called 
in, and subjected to imprisonment. April 17th, Waterbury secured 
625 lbs. of gunpowder. On the 26th, Gen. Tryon fell upon Danbury, " 
where three regiments were gathered, awaiting orders. Military 
stores had also been collected there, which were destroyed by the 
enemy. It was estimated that iSoo barrels of beef and pork, 800 of 
flour, 2000 bushels of grain, 1790 tents. 100 hogsheads of rum, and 
clothing for a regiment, were taken or destroyed, accompanied by 
the burning of houses and the murder of inoffensive inhabitants. 
It is easy to picture the consternation in Waterbury at this event. 
Her soldiers must have responded to the alarm, but I have not 
found other evidence of their deeds than the following autograph 
receipt among my papers : 

Waterbury gth of April A. D. 1778 then received of Lieut. Col: Jonathan Bald- 
win Sixteen pounds Twelve shillings & two pence Lawful monej'- to Pay the officers 
& Soldiers belonging to the Company under my command for their servis in the 
alarm at Danbury in the month of April A. D. 1777. Received by me 

Moses Foot Lt. 

There is also "A Roster for Col Cooks Regt August 21 A. D. 1777," 
giving the following list of the captains of 29 companies in that 
regiment. They are : 



WATERBURY IN THE REVOLUTION. 



439 



THE NUMBER OF ABLE MEN IN EACH COMPANY. 



Capt. Samuel Camp, 


. 29 Capt. Ephraim Cook, 


. 40 




Charles Norton, . 


41 


Benjamin Richards, • 


32 




James Robinson, . 


. 26 


' Phineas Castle, 


. 20 




Ambrous Hine, . 


26 


' Sam" Bronson, . 


. 38 




' Caleb Hall, . 


• 41 


Jesse Curtis, . 


• 14 




' Bezeliel Ives, 


49 


Stephen Seymour, 


7 




' ElishaHall, . 


. 40 


' Thomas Fenn, 


• 33 




' Oliver Stanley, . 


. 63 


Isaac Bronson, 


iS 




' John Couch, . 


. 26 


John Woodruff, 


• 41 




' Dan Collins, 


2S 


Nathaniel Barns, 


23 




' Nathaniel Bunnel, . 


• 33 


' John Lewis, . 


. 40 




' Miles Johnson, . 


29 


' Josiah Terril, 


10 




' Miles Hull, . 


. 26 


Jotham Curtis, 


. 12 




' Jesse Moss, . 


29 


Joseph Garnsey, 


29 




Stephen Yale, 


• 34 







Of the above 877 men, 434 marched with Lieut. -Colonel Baldwin 
to Fishkill in October, as would appear from an " Abstract of money- 
paid as a bounty at Fishkill in Oct., 1777." The men were to receive 
one pound each (see Record of Conn. Men in the War of the Revo- 
lution, p. 523), but there is also the following abstract among my 
papers, which I give, and from which it would appear that the 
above service was for twenty-seven days : 

A Pay Abstract for the lo"* Militia Reg' from the State of Connecticut com- 
manded bv L' Col" Baldwin for service at Fish Kill in Oct'' 1777— 



Lieut Col° Baldwin 

Maj'' Porter 

Chaplain Stores 

Adj' Hoi:gh 

Quf Master Hickox 

Surgeon Elton [John] 

Surg" Mate Gaylord 

Serg' Maj'' Foster 

Quf Mas"' Scott 

Captains Samuel Bronson 

B. Richards 

Caleb Hall 

J. Moss 

J. Robinson 

O. Stanley 

N. Barns 

P. Castle 

E. Cook 



NO. MEN. 


TOTAL 
NO. DAYS. 


AMOUNT OF WAGES. 




27 


16 


4 






23 


II 


10 






27 










27 


10 


2 


6 




27 


7 


5 


9 




27 


13 


10 






27 


10 


16 






27 


2 


S 


10 




27 


2 


3 


3 


60 


1620 


130 


II 


6 


60 


1335 


113 


2 


2 


60 


1480 


"5 


I 


7 


60 


1539 


127 


10 


2 


59 


I35I 


106 


II 


3i 


59 


I34S 


no 


I 


4 


60 


1327 


109 


17 


6 


62 


1519 


123 


19 


3 


61 


1473 


120 


I 


I 



^^o BISTORT OF WATERS UBT. 

In the thirteen Waterbury companies belonging to this regi- 
ment on the 22d of August in the next year but 221 men are 
returned as fit for duty, of which number 99 seem to have been 
drafted upon four or more subsequent calls. This account makes 
evident the depletion of the regiment by service, enlistments into 
the army, and the casualties of war. 

When Danbury was raided, Washington's army was still in win- 
ter quarters at Morristown, where it remained until May. General 
Burgoyne was in Canada, preparing to invade the States with 
"seven thousand troops, a train of artillery, and several tribes 
of Indians," with the design to advance from the north and cut off 
communication between New England and the Southern States. In 
anticipation of this attack, the New England militia had been arriv- 
ing from day to day at Ticonderoga and at Mount Independence — 
which were opposite to each other on the lake, at a distance of over 
twelve hundred feet. The two fortifications were connected by a 
floating bridge, which had been constructed through enormous 
labor and at great expense (and in part by Connecticut men). 
Twenty-two piers had been built in the lake — that part of it some- 
times called South Bay — and between the piers were fifty-foot 
floats, fastened together with iron chains and rivets. On the north 
side of the bridge was a large-timbered boom, well-bolted and 
riveted, and the boom was still farther strengthened by a double 
iron chain. This bridge was thought to form an impenetrable bar- 
rier to the passage of any vessel that might attempt it. On Mount 
Independence, which was strongly fortified and supplied with artil- 
lery, was the hospital where so many of our soldiers were suffering. 
While our Waterbury men in Col. Cook's regiment had been hasten- 
ing northward to defend Ticonderoga and Independence from the 
expected enemy from the north, our Lieut-Col. Baldwin, with his 
regiment, was going or had gone to the Highlands to perform a 
similar service in preventing the enemy from passing up the Hud- 
son river to assist Burgoyne. From Fort Montgomery and Fort 
Clinton on the west bank, a boom and chain, on the same principle 
as the one on Lake Champlain, extended across the river. Properly 
protected by a sufficient number of troops at the forts, the barriers 
across Lake Champlain and the Hudson would have proved effective, 
but the men of Fort Montgomery and Fort Clinton had been called 
off to help Gen. Gates in the north, and Gen. Putnam at Peekskill 
had but a small force to guard the stores. Such was the condition 
of affairs at Ticonderoga and on the Hudson when early in July 
Burgoyne came down upon the Americans, whether for siege or 
assault, it was not known. To their astonishment, he ascended 



WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. ' 441 

Mount Defiance, dragging, it is said, his cannon over the tree tops, 
thus holding the American fortifications at his mercy, as Defiance 
commanded both Ticonderoga and Independence. In the night, the 
almost instant flight of the American army was accomplished. The 
sick and wounded, a few hospital stores, as many cannon, tents, and 
provisions (of which but twenty-days' supply were in the forts), as 
could be thrust into five galleys and two hundred batteaux, started 
in flight, but Burgoyne's forces burst the bridge between the forts 
and followed the Americans, who were forced to abandon artillery, 
stores, and even their sick and wounded. On the 19th of Septem- 
ber in the battle of Stillwater, and at Saratoga, both Lieut. -Col. 
Baldwin and Major Porter were present. Col. Thaddeus Cook's 
orderly book, ** in possession of the Worcester Antiquarian Society, 
reports among those present, the Lieut. -Col., the Major, and others, 
but gives no names." In Major Porter's orderly book, I find the fol- 
lowing, under date of Aug. 20th, 1777: "The Rank of Each Com- 
pany- in the loth Regiment of Militia and the names of Each Offi- 
cer. Field Officers, Col. Thaddeus Cook, Wallingford; Lieut. -Col. 
Jonth" Baldwin, Waterbury; Maj"" Phineas Porter, Waterbury," and 
as the battle of Stillwater occurred only a month later, there prob- 
ably had been no change in the regimental officers. From Dr. 
Bronson, it appears that Lieut. Michael Bronson acted as adjutant 
of Col. Cook's regiment, and particularly distinguished himself in 
the above battles. In October, Sir Henry Clinton, with his forces, 
appeared on the North river, before the forts Montgomery and 
Clinton, and demanded of the brothers Clinton, their commandants, 
a surrender. Being refused, an assault was made and the forts 
taken, but a part of the garrisons escaped, leaving about two hun- 
dred and fifty men killed, wounded, or prisoners. At the same time, 
General Putnam, guarding with insufficient troops the stores and 
provisions at Peekskill, was forced to retire from his position. 

The above is only the faintest glimpse of the reverses that were 
continually befalling our army and cutting off in their youth the 
sons of New England. In 1777 nearly three thousand Americans 
were slain, or wounded, or made prisoners, before October. 

In the history of our town-meetings it is highly probable that no 
more jubilant one was ever held than that of Oct. 22, 1777, for the 
news must have reached the town that five days before, the British 
army, under Burgoyne, had surrendered, at Saratoga. No wonder 
is it that the good men, with "Timothy Judd, Esq'", chosen mod- 
erator and Abner Johnson Clerk Pro temporary," on the " Request 
of the Governor and Council of Safety requesting sundry articles of 
clothing for the Continental soldiers," responded, by appointing fif. 



_^ ^ HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

442 

teen o-entlemen to carry the request into execution. They were Eli 
Bronson, David Taylor, Moses Cook, Peter Welton, Abraham 
Andrews, Samuel Hikcox, Phineas Royce, Esq., John Dunbar (the 
father of Moses), Caleb Barnes, Joseph Sutliff, Jr., Daniel Alcox, 
Simeon Hopkins, Samuel Lewis, Esq., Gideon Hotchkiss and Ira 
Beebe. The selectmen were to take the money out of the treasury 
or otherwise provide to procure the clothing required, which was 
for each non-commissioned officer and soldier belonging to such 
town, one shirt or more, one hunting frock, one pair of woolen over- 
alls, one or two pair of stockings, and one pair of good shoes. The 
selectmen afterwards presented an account against the State, show- 
ing that Waterbury provided at this time, "115 woolen shirts, in 
which were 262>4 yards of shirting; 24 linen shirts, with 65 yards of 
linen; 133 hunting frocks [after Washington's suggestion in Major 
Porter's of derly book] having 366 yards of toe cloth in them; 130 
pair of over halls, having 305^ yds fulled cloth; 184 pairs of stock- 
ings; 127 pairs or shoes; and 5 sacks of toe cloth for transporting 
clothing." It will be remembered that Waterbury promised to give 
a bounty of twelve pounds a year to 131 men who should enlist into 
the Continental army for three years or for the war, and it was for 
these men that this clothing was to be provided. Many of them 
were in Chandler's regiment, and a goodly number in Capt. David 
Smith's company. These men of ours had recently passed through 
the battle of Germantown, and the cold nights of autumn were upon 
them, and the winter at Valley Forge lay just before them. 

In December, 1777, to provide for the families of soldiers in the 
Continental army, Capt. Stephen Matthews, Thomas Dutton, Jona- 
than Scott, Benjamin Munson, Dan" Bronson, Capt. John Welton, 
John Thompson, Wait Hotchkiss, Dan" Sanford, Sam" Scovill, 
Thomas Fauncher, Capt. Sam" Porter, Gideon Hickcox, Stephen 
Warner, Samuel Judd, Jr., Isaac Prichard, Aaron Benedict, Aaron ^ 
Dunbar and Josiah Rogers were chosen, and thirty-eight surveyors 
of highways were appointed. In Jan., 1778, the " Representatives" 
were directed to petition the General Assembly for two more select- 
men than the law then admitted; a rate was laid of six pence on the 
pound, to be collected by the first of March, and nine men were 
appointed to collect it; to provide clothing for the soldiers, were 
chosen Joseph Hopkins, Esq., James Porter, Jr., Silas Hotchkiss, 
David Taylor, Isaac Merriam, Lot Osborn, Theophilus Baldwin, 
Samuel Parker, Capt. Stephen Seymour, Charles Cook, Charles 
Upson, Josiah Rogers, Ira Beebe, Ashbel Porter, and Ebenezer Por- 
ter, Jr. When we consider the great number of officers selected, we 
must also consider the expanse of territory covered by the town- 



WATERBURY IN THE REVOLUTION. 



445 



ship, and the exigencies of our men at Valley Forge. Clearing for- 
ests with bare feet in December snows, without blankets, with little 
food, and no money; building log-huts on the cleared ground, with 
benumbed fingers and chilled hearts; falling down under th'e 
enforcing hand of illness, with no pillowing tenderness to soften the 
fall — such was the fate of some of our soldiers. No wonder is it 
that Waterbury appointed fifteen men to gather clothing. It is 
perhaps unnecessary to mention in this connection the tmappointed 
women, who spun and wove by daylight, and knit by moon and 
candle light for the bleeding feet and freezing bodies of their 
beloved ones, "gone to the army." 

The entire number who wintered at Valley Forge from our town 
I am not able to name. vSylvanus Adams, John Saxton, Ezekiel 
Scott, Ezekiel Upson, Lue Smith, Joseph Freedom, Mark Richards^ 
Joel Roberts, Elisha Munson, Elisha Hikcox, and William Bassett 
were there, and under the command of Capt. David Smith. Nearly 
all of the above were young men — one of them, John Saxton, a boy 
not yet seventeen, and Mark Richards was but a few months older. 
As three-fourths of the soldiers of the Continental line wintered 
at Valley Forge, it will appear that a large number of our men 
were among the '■'thousands'' who "were without blankets, and, 
after the fatigues of the day, were obliged to warm themselves over 
fires all night, having neither small clothes, shoes, or stockings." 
Half-rations for weeks in succession, four or five days together 
without bread, and as many without beef or pork — three thousand 
soldiers at one time too ill to perform military duty in a camp of 
eleven thousand men — with a powerful, well-fed, well-conditioned 
enemy within twenty miles, enjoying all the comforts that Phila- 
delphia afforded. Could patriotism bear more or further go? Out 
from that camp came, in June of 1778, the soldiers who fought 
the battle of Monmouth with the Royal forces then retreating 
from Philadelphia to New York on a day when the heat was so 
intense that many soldiers in both armies died from that alone. 
It is said that " the tongues of the soldiers were so swollen, 
that they could not be retained in their mouths." A Waterbury 
woman, Millisent, the daughter of Lieut. -Col. Jonathan Baldwin, 
fed the soldiers of Washington's army all that da)^, cooking for 
them from morning till night all the provisions that she could 
procure.* 

* A little later — her father, having gone to New Jersey to escort his daughter home, she being then the 
widow of Isaac Booth Lewis— they were on the return journey (Col. Baldwin having one of her two children 
on his horse, and Mrs. Lewis the other child on her horse) when in fording a stream, the current bore Mrs. 
Lewis's horse from its feet, and carried it down stream. Expecting to be drowned, she managed to throw 
her child safely to the bank, and subsequently escaped herself. 



EISTOR T OF WA TERB UR T. 

AAA 

On the 19th of Jan., 1778, Waterbury held an adjourned meeting : 
For the Purpose of Taking into Consideration the Articles of Confederation, 
the former moderator not attending, the meeting made choice of Thomas Matthews 
Esq-- to Lead in said meeting. Then the meeting proceeded to read and consider 
said Articles of Confederation, and approved of the first, second, third and fourth. 
As to the fifth article it is the mind of this meeting that the Power of Choosing 
Delegates to Congress is invested in the People, on this condition we concur, also 
approve of the sixth and seventh. As to the Eighth Article, the Method of Propor- 
tionino- the Tax for supplying the Common Treasury is not satisfactory; as to the 
Ninth Article where it mentions the Number of Land forces made by Regulations 
from each State for its Quota in proportion to White Inhabitants in Such State, we 
had rather chuse it should be in Proportion to the Number of free subjects in Each 
State, also approved of the loth nth 12th & 13th Article. After going through the 
whole of said Articles, the whole was Put to Vote and passed in the affirmative 
Excepting the above Exceptions & reserves, the meeting Dismist. 

Thus we have Waterbury's independent and expressed opinion 
upon the national " Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union " 
agreed upon by Congress, and quite in advance of that of the 
Connecticut Legislature. 



CHAPTER XXXIV. 

BOUNTIES — CLOTHING FOR CONTINENTAL SOLDIERS SUPPLIES FOR SOL- 
DIERS' FAMILIES TAXES CONTINENTAL MONEY CONNECTICUT 

BILLS OF CREDIT TOWN TREASURER'S ACCOUNTS — ON THE CON- 
TINENTAL ROAD EAST FARMS BURYING-YARD JOSEPH BEACH'S 

TAVERN — EVENTS IN 1779-1783 HIRING SOLDIERS FOR HORSE 

NECK THE SOCIETIES OF WESTBURY AND NORTHBURY INCORPOR- 
ATED AS WATERTOWN MISCELLANY DIARY OF JOSIAH ATKINS 

JUDAH FRISBIE WATERBURY MEN WHO SERVED IN THE WAR OF 

THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 

THE formula for enlistment into the Continental army — for 
which town bounties were paid at the rate of six pounds 
for every six months — has not been met, but there lies be- 
fore me the following receipt : 

Waterbury, August the loth, 1777 : Rec'd of the Treasurer of the Town of sd 
Waterbury the sum of five Pound Lawful money for the Purpose of going into Pub- 
lick service and Joining the Regiment under the Command of Col" Comfort Sage at 
the Piks Kills in the Room of one that has Paid in their fine. Rec^ by me 

Silvanus Adams. 

So far as known to the writer, there are no records of bounties 
paid before Jan. 12, 1778. In 1778 and 1779 we find seventy-eight 
first, ninety-three second, and ninety-five third bounties paid. 
Josiah Atkins seems to have been the first man to receive a third 
bounty. It must be kept in mind that only the soldiers of the Con- 
tinental line (who entered for three years, or for the war) were the 
recipients of the above town bounty.* 

Doubtless many bounties were paid not specified as such, but 
only those thus designated are numbered, although soldiers' names 
frequently appear with six pounds paid in connection therewith. 
In some instances, a man received his six bounties at the same time. 
The first bounties paid in 1778 were on January 12th to Thomas 
Button, for Jonathan Davis, and for Thomas Merchant. Stephen 
Welton, Jr., was the third recipient, Ebenezer Brown the fourth, 

*After the close of the war, suits were brought by a number of persons who claimed that they were num- 
bered with the 131 and had not been paid. I have one in which Samuel Lewis of Watertown claims that he 
" enlisted at Waterbury, May 24, 1777, in Capt. David Smith's company in Col. [John] Chandler's regiment 
and was counted with the 131 men entitled to receive a bounty." Waterbury and Watertown being the 
defendants, (in this case) the suit probably grew out of the separation of the towns. 



^^5 HISTORY OF WATERBUBT. 

and, in April, bounties were given to George Prichard, Jr., Jonah 
Maliory, Isaac Cleveland, Samuel Smith, David Wells and David 
Punderson. The first man to receive his second bounty was Caleb 
Scott— his father, Gideon, receiving it in his name. 

In Dec. of 1777, the town lent ;2^207 "to the committee to pur- 
chase clothing for soldiers in the Continental army ; " but collec- 
tions and " fines for not going into Publick service " were paid in, so 
that by May 5th, there was a little balance left in the treasury. In 
November and December of 1777 £a12 was received in fines, and 
this was before the currency became greatly depreciated. In March 
or April, 1778, James Bronson made a journey to Pennsylvania, for 
the town, at the cost of ^8-10-9, which the record refers to, as 
"being a present made to the Town " by him. It is notable as being 
the only "present" made to the tcnvn that is on record to date.* 
Everything was conducted by " our fathers " on business principles, 
The town was exacting, its citizens equally so. 

Clothing for Continental soldiers was furnished by the majority of 
the families in town, but provisions were often late in arriving to 
home consumers. We find in 1780 that Major Smith was " paid in cash 
to make him good for his not having the money seasonable"^i39-3-4, 
and "to Provision purchased for his family to make up the arrears 
of the year 1779 ;^i69-i5; Ambrose Potter is credited for paying 
Samiiel Camp ^150," to make him good upon the account of his 
family not being supplied in season. The accounts of expenditures 
remaining to us are too imperfect to be summarized. vScores of citi- 
zens received money to provide for soldiers'families, but seldom do 
we find any intimation of the individual family cared for. Ezekiel 
vSanford (a soldier) had a child that must have called forth the sym- 
pathies of the public, for it is twice referred to in the records as a 
"poor child." In April, 1779 there was "paid to Capt. Nathaniel 
Barnes for Ezekiel Sanford's wife for encouragement for her to 
take care of her poor child ^£21-6" and in July of 1780 Ezekiel was 

* Gifts had been made to the First Church by Joseph Lewis and I think by other men. The following inter- 
esting portion of Stephen Hopkins' will relates to the " Poor in the town." The will had been probated nine 
yearsat this date : "Also it is my will that twenty pounds lawful money out of my estate be put upon interest 
within a conv^enient time after my decease to be in bank for the use and benefit of the poor in the town of 
Waterbury without limitation of time, the interest of which to be distributed annually at the discretion of the 
selectmen of the town of Waterbury for the time being, who are hereby fully empowered in trust with rela- 
tion to said legacy to be let out, collected, received and disbursed, and act in law for the purpose above said — 
but that the charitable end of this legacy may be fully known and answered, and not perverted for the use of 
such poor as are slothful, vicious or unwholesome members of society, it is understood to be my will and is 
hereby ordered that the interest to be annually distributed shall be limited and confined to such as are in the 
full communion in the regular orthodox churches in this town, which hold and worship according to the 
method settled, established and now generally practiced in this colony. Stephen Hopkins." 

Woodbury Probate Records, Vol. 6, p. 177. 

In the year of which we are writing, the interest of the above gift was one pound and four shillings — 
paid to the town by Thomas Hickcox, Jr. 



WATERS URY IJY THE REVOLUTION. 447 

■^'allowed for keeping his poor child eight months," at the rate of 
four shillings a week. 

The first purchase of provisions for a soldier's family in 1778, 
was made by Capt. Jotham Curtis, who received from the town ^12 
for that use. This was quickly followed by the expenditure of large 
sums for provisions, and also for "clothing for Continental soldiers." 
Moneys were dispensed for specified purposes as "bounties, provis- 
ions, cloathing," and, in addition, "by order of the select men," and, 
"by order of the committee." In 1778 the State repaid the Town 
,-01677-17-9 "for defraying the charges of those that supplyed the 
soldiers' families last year." 

In 1780 our Committee of Supplies received from the vState 
^5464. In Connecticut throughout its life as a colony, and as a 
state during its first war, there was but one standard of values — 
that of provisions. Is there any other to-day ? At this time the 
people were taxed almost beyond endurance. The taxes within one 
twelvemonth were the following: Nov. 16, 1780, a rate was laid of 
six pence in provisions, or double in States' money; the following 
January, eight pence in States' money. This is the last recognition 
of paper currency in our taxation. On the same day a tax was laid 
of three half-pence, payable in provisions; June 21, four pence, in 
silver or Gold,* or good merchantable beef cattle at prices which 
had been named by the Assembly; July 9, three pence lawful silver 
money, or provision, or clothing at prices fixed by legislation. 

As a result of oppressive taxation and in return, every man 
lived, so far as he could, upon the Town and the State. There 
seemed to be no other resource. War is robbery. Government 
robbed the people; of men, so that it was with difficulty that crops 
could be planted or garnered; of provisions, until famine was at the 
doors of the inhabitants, and within the armed camps; of money, 
until in one instance in Waterbury it reached a point where Joseph 
Atkins paid fourteen pounds of Continental money for a debt of 
seven silver shillings. This was near the time when the last of the 
two hundred millions of dollars in Continental bills had been 
issued. Connecticut bills of credit stood at ten for one at the time 
when Continental bills stood at thirty for one — the one being silver. 
A transaction for cash meant concurrent iDayment. Town transac- 
tions with individuals are variously estimated — in Continental 

money. States money, hard money, old money, cash, and silver 

even counterfeit money was abundant. 

Through the courtesy of Mr. Elisha Leavenworth we have the 
records of Ezra Bronson, Esq., as town treasurer during several 



* The first mention of this metal found in our records. 



Q HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

44b 

years of the war. For the Danbury alarm, Stephen Hopkins fur- 
nished 3 bushels of wheat, Ebenezer Hoadly i, John Hopkins i and 
16 lbs. of pork, Joseph Hopkins, Esq. 38 pounds of pork, "found for 
the militia when they went to Danbury," by one cow valued at 
^13-10 in States money, Moses Cook " i2>4 lb. of pork," Timothy 
Porter 20 lbs., Benjamin Baldwin 20 lbs., '' that went to Danbury," 
and John Thompson is credited " by a horse going to Danbury in a 
team." In 1778 Dr. Lemuel Hopkins is credited with doctoring one 
Robert Cooper and his wife; Peter Welton went to Hartford "to 
request liberty to carry the soldiers' clothing to the camp." at a cost 
of ^3, but Joseph Hopkins, Esq., at the same date " went to New 
Haven with the clothing." In the same year Silas Constant lent six 
shillings in silver to hire soldiers for Horseneck, and Amos Prichard 
carried a sick soldier to Southington. The same sick soldier was 
probably kept by Josiah Bronson, for at the same date he is credited 
for keeping a sick soldier and " getting one pint and a half of wine 
and tending." The same poor fellow was attended by Dr. Abel 
Bronson, as we find him allowed " by a bill for Docktring a sick 
soldier who lived at Lieut. Bronsons." Elizabeth Skinner boarded 
a lame soldier two weeks in the same year. " Sick soldiers " had 
become such a burden to the people living along the " Continental 
road running east and west through Waterbury " that in July, 1780, 
the selectmen were directed by the town " to prepare a memorial to 
the General Assembly, asking that a provision be made for cost 
arising by soldiers when sick on the road to and from the army 
belonging to this State." Four months before the memorial was 
ordered, the town had bought of Joseph Beach, for fifteen shillings, 
"a piece of ground for a burying yard." This was our present 
East Farms cemetery, and it is said that the earliest burials there 
(before the purchase of the land by the town) were of soldiers who, 
worn out and ill, had reached the tavern close by— kept during the 
war by Joseph Beach — and there had died. 

The confusion and distress of the period is stamped upon the 
town records. Entries were evidently made from detached minutes 
of town meetings, some of which seem to have been lost or left 
unrecorded. Ezra Bronson was unable to do the work required of 
him, and Michael Bronson assisted, and the result is to be regret- 
ted. 

In 1779 Esq"". Judd was paid £,g for "his journey to Lebanon for 
lead; John Trumball, Jr., and Joseph Hopkins, Esq., sent in bills 
for attending the convention;" David Taylor went to Hartford "to 
exhibit a cloathing bill, was allowed £,6 "for damage done a gun in 
the public service," and furnished house room and dinners for the 



WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 



449 



selectmen. They were ordinarily entertained by Ezra Bronson, 
his accounts being strewn with scores of dinners for public 
officials; but other men, notably Col. Baldwin, furnished "meals" 
for selectmen and the civil authority. 

In 1780 David Turner is credited "for two days service warn- 
ing people to give in account of their grain;" Michael Bronson "pur- 
sued after some waggons to Breakneck," furnished 12^2 pounds of 
lead, and bailed two pots; Joseph Hotchkiss went to Guilford for 
salt; Dr. Roger Conant, deceased, is credited for services; Dr. John 
Elton for doctoring Mrs. Clark and Joseph Griffith; Dr. Osee Dut- 
ton and Dr. Timothy Porter are paid for services; widow Mary 
Clark kept the selectmen two days, and widow Huldah Richards was 
one of the women who furnished clothing. In this and other years 
dozens of men are credited with "paying vSolomon Tompkins," but 
no hint is obtained of the nature of the obligation; Joel Blakslee 
brought a hogshead of clothing from New Haven; Thomas Bron- 
son, Jr., went to vSalem after tents; Thaddeus Bronson furnished 
wheat flour and pork "for the militia;" Aaron Benedict was paid 
"for expenses for the team transporting for the militia marching to 
West Point" ^251; Eliasaph Doolittle furnished _j/^too " to provide 
for some poor people " — and in evidence of the severity of the 
weather, Peter Welton was " allowed for carrying the corpse of 
John Welton to the grave in that extreme season in the snow 96 
dollars "—rendered ^28-16-0. (Jan. nth "the extremity of the sea- 
son " prevented a town meeting). In July, Enoch Scott and others 
assisted the county surveyor in measuring the town, and in October 
he "numbered the people." These acts were in reference to the 
formation of the Societies of Northbury and Westbury into the 
township of Watertown. 

In 1781 Lemuel Nichols was credited "by a bill for cash paid 
out in silver for transporting provisions to Fishkill ^4-5-11; " the 
widow Clark was paid " for keeping a yoke of cattle that was going 
to Fishkill; " Zera Beebe spent the fourth of October making tents; 
James Bronson went to camp to procure evidence; Ephraim Warner 
lost a chain in transporting provisions to Fishkill; William Rowley 
fulled five blankets; Gideon Hikcox and Silas Constant lent the 
town six shillings in silver to hire soldiers for Horseneck. In 
March, Joseph Hotchkiss is credited for packing and coppering the 
provisions that went to Danbury, and Aaron Benedict transported 
"for the army" to West Point.* Among the unusual items found 



* Young Watertown when only two or three months old furnished her men (ordered for the relief of West 
Point) under Lieut. -Col. Benjamin Richards, 707 pounds of wheat flour, and beside other stores, 514 pounds 
of salt pork. Waterbury furnished the tents and provisions, and the tents were conveyed to Ridgefield— 40 
miles. — by "2 teams, 4 cattle each." 

29 



BISTORT OF WATERS URY. 

in 1782 is one relating to the nniversal difficulty in obtaining- salt. 
Joseph Hotchkiss went to Guilford after salt, and Nathaniel Merrils 
received money "towards his journey after salt." 

Among the mysteries of Capt. Ezra Bronson's accounts Agur 
Mallory appears. Of him we gather that a man of that name paid 
taxes here in 1774. In 1778 Capt. Gideon Hotchkiss sent in a bill to 
the town "for services in looking a place and moving Agur Mal- 
lory," and for "meat, milk, sider, apple butter, firewood, grain and 
other articles furnished for him;" October 12, 1779, Capt. Josiah 
Terrill received ^46 "for twenty days' service in looking after 
Agur Mallory when at the Pool." In November of the same year 
Titus Hotchkiss served "nine days in assisting him home from the 
Pool, at Nine Dollars per Day, ^24-6-0." Dec. 6, 1779, John Hopkins 
is credited with "a sheet to put over Agur Mallory when he went 
to the Pool," and Capt. Thomas Fenn "for the service of a horse to 
the Pool." In 1780 Jude Hoadly made "a horse litter to carry him 
on;" Timothy Wetmore is credited "by a Bill for 8 Days' service 
o-oing to the Pool with him;" Enos Warner went "/// to the Pool" 
with him at the same date, and for three or four years Agur Mallory 
is "moved" again and again, and must have proved a costly invalid 
for the town until in 1782 Mary Mallory apparently came to Water- 
bury, and after keeping him three months asked the town to reward 
her with the modest sum of four pounds. Nothing further has 
been noticed regarding Agur Mallory. 

In the town accounts, many times repeated, can be found the 
expression : " By service done for the town." No intimation is to 
be gained of its nature. " Provisions for soldiers' families " and 
" Cloathing for soldiers " and " vSundry articles for soldiers " or for 
soldiers' families are found on every page — interspersed with " a 
cow," or "a sheep," "a pair of stockings" or "a blanket." Rates 
are " turned " and flour, corn, rye and oats are furnished — to be paid 
for; the bridges appear in some form on ever)^ page, and the follow- 
ing facts regarding the hiring of soldiers are found. 

The troubles and difficulties attending the hiring of soldiers 
after 1779 were almost insurmountable. Enthusiasm had vanished. 
Patriotism was not dead, but it slumbered and slept — worn to a 
weariness that nothing but the near approach of danger, like the 
attacks upon the near-by towns, could arouse to new action. When, 
in January of 1780, Waterbury was rec^uired to furnish thirteen 
soldiers for the army for three years, they could not be obtained, 
and a compromise was made for one year — the town engaging " to 
pay half the bounty or wages which should be engaged by them in 
provision or clothing at the prices which such articles commonly 



WATERS UEY IN THE REVOLUTION. 451 

sold for in the year 1774, and the other half in lawful money or 
Rills of Credit equivalent to such sum of provisions or clothing at 
the time of pa3'ment." Other inducements were offered, such as an 
immediate supply for the needs of soldiers' families. In July, ten 
other soldiers were required, and in November the town was classed 
or divided, by an Act of Assembly, to facilitate the raisin o- of sol- 
diers. Capt. Ezra Bronson was made " Purchasing- Commissary to 
receive the provisions to be collected for the use of the Continental 
army and forces raised for the defense of the State, upon a six- 
penny rate " (by Act of Assembly). He was to provide casks and see 
the same well put up. If any man refused to meet this rate, he was 
to be made to pay double in States money. A few men did refuse 
but they paid double. The town appointed forty-three men to 
inspect the provisions thus collected, among whom were Col. 
Phineas Porter, Lieut. -Col. Benjamin Richards, and Major Jesse 
Curtis. The date of the above appointment was March 20, 1780. It 
was an important meeting. The last rate in Continental money was 
laid — three shillings on the pound; the Church of England was 
denied any future income from the sale of lands given by the 
proprietors in 17 15, and the town voted to prefer a memorial to 
the General Assembly, praying that the Societies of Westbury 
and Northbury should be incorporated into a separate town, and be 
annexed to the County of Litchfield. The conditions offered by 
Waterbury were simple and few. The new town was to pay one- 
half of the expenses of rebuilding a bridge over the river on the 
Woodbury road in the same form as then erected, and half the 
expenses of supporting one Agur Mallory; it was required to cjuit 
claim all right and title to the public school and ministerial moneys 
—in consideration for which it was to hold all the unsold town 
lands within its borders; all military stores and the camp equipage 
belonging to the town of Waterbury were to be equally divided 
between the two towns, when the new one should be incorporated. 
With respect to the dividing lines, a committee composed of men 
from each society in the township was to meet and determine the 
division and report to the next meeting, but the line was not defi- 
nitely established for several years. 

On the 17th of September in this year (17S0) ''General Washing- 
ton with the Marquis de la Fayette and General Knox with a splen- 
did retinue," left the camp at Tappan (about thirty miles below 
West Point) for Hartford. This was with little doubt one of the 
occasions when Washington passed through Waterbury. His object 
was to confer with the commanding officers of the French fleet and 
army (6000 men) which had recently arrived at Rhode Island. He 



4- 2 HISTORY OF WATEEBURY. 

was absent from camp nine days, during which time Major Andre 
made the fatal journey to West Point or its vicinity, to confer with 
Benedict Arnold. The express, sent to meet General Washington 
with the direful news of Arnold's treasonable interview (gained by 
Andre's capture), taking a different road, failed to meet him. If it 
were not for this failure, we might think that this was the occasion 
fitting the tradition which tells us that General Washington once 
rode loo miles in one day. 

In 1 78 1 when Gov. Tryon with a detachment of British troops 
marched from King's Bridge to Horse Neck (a former horse pasture 
for the town of Greenwich) every effort was made to raise soldiers 
for the defense of that point. Waterbury's quota — Westbury and 
Northbury having departed from it^was seven men. Abraham and 
David Wooster refused to pay their proportion toward hiring a 
recruit in the class to which they belonged. David Welton, Henry 
Grilley, Stephen and Timothy vScovill also neglected or refused to 
pay — but they were obliged "to pay double." 

Waterbury was called upon for sixty-nine soldiers after Water- 
town was incorporated. Eighteen of the number were required 
early in 1781 and were to serve one year from the following ]March, 
at Horse Neck, and were " to be had on as reasonable terms as they 
could be procured." The eighteen men were not to be had. Is it 
surprising, when "under their complicated distresses" officers and 
men were exhausted? The confidence of the army in public prom- 
ises was chilled almost unto death, and despair had taken the place 
of patience and fortitude. All that the army asked was "a perma- 
nent and comfortable support." Regimental officers were contin- 
ually resigning and exclaiming: "Let others come and take their 
turn! " 

It was during this winter that Col. Elisha Sheldon's regiment of 
dragoons (240 men and 140 horses) was quartered for a time in 
Waterbur3^ There being insufficient accommodation, the town 
asked that the regiment might be quartered elsewhere, as "no army 
supplies were kept here." 

The eighteen men were not secured on the 6th of March, and 
some suitable person was empowered to "get them any other way 
that should be judged best." It would seem by a subsequent "diffi- 
culty" which arose, that Seba Bronson and William Leavenworth 
were permitted to obtain soldiers on this occasion. Six of the 
above soldiers were Eli Rowley, Asa Chittenden, Ezekiel Porter, 
Toto Cornelius (secured for "^18 cash in States' money and he to 
receive his wages"), Zebulon Miller and Daniel Williams. May 7, 
1 781, Eli Rowley is credited "by Entering the Public Service for 



WATERBURY IN THE REVOLUTION. 453 

the Defence of Horse Neck and is to be paid three pounds per 
month, hard money — the obligation given by Samuel Scott, Jr." 
To or for Asa Chittenden, Eli Bronson gave the obligation. A week 
later a call came for ten footmen and one horse and horseman for 
the post at Horse Neck. To secure men, the town promised that 
the wages offered by the State " should be paid in silver punctually 
(one recorder [Michael Bronson] has it perpetually^ at 6-8 per ounce, 
or an equivalent in Bills of Credit." Eli Bronson and Joseph 
Atkins were made town agents and empowered to procure the men 
and give them " such further sums as they should think proper, if 
to be had by April ist." Jacob Sperry was appointed to procure 
three ox teams, drivers, and carts for Continental service. June 21, 
the town held another meeting '' for the purpose of contriving ways 
and means for procuring the town's quota of soldiers for Horse 
Neck and the Continental army." Capt. John Welton was given 
" full power to hire seven men " and reward them with " hard 
money, provisions or neat cattle." The seven men were obtained 
apparently without great difficulty or delay, and the following events 
probably influenced the men who enlisted. 

In May, General Washington had again journeyed to Con- 
necticut to rq,eet Count de Rochambeau, and in all probability 
passed through Waterbury at that time. It was on or about 
June 2ist — the date of the town meeting when the seven men 
were to be hired "for hard money, provisions or cattle" — that 
the French army under General Rochambeau marched through 
Waterbury, on its way to meet Washington's army near King's 
Bridge. What welcome travelers the bonny Frenchmen must have 
proved themselves as they journeyed on, for they paid all their 
expenses in hard money, committing no depredations, and treating 
the inhabitants with great civility and propriety. The officers 
wore "coats of white broadcloth trimmed with green, white under- 
dress, and hats with two corners, instead of three, (like the cocked 
hats worn by American officers). Sixteen months later the same 
army again passed through Waterbury. An old inhabitant told 
Dr. Bronson (as given in page 359 History of Waterbury, 1858), 
that the soldiers marched two and two, and when the head of 
the column had disappeared beyond the hill at Capt. George 
Nichols, (the Dr. James Brown house, still standing), the other 
extremity had not come in sight on West Side hill. What a picture 
of Waterbury in 1781 that bit of description affords us ! One could 
stand on the East Main Street hill, above its intersection with 
Mill street, and have an unobstructed view to the top of West 
Side hill. 



HISrORT OF WATERBURY. 

454 

The following' items relating to the passage of portions of the 
arniv through Waterbury are given by Dr. Bronson, and are 
undoubtedly authentic. He refers to the main east and west road 
through Waterbury, as communicating with Hartford and Middle- 
town eastward, and with Fishkill and the Hudson river by way of 
Break Neck hill in Middlebury westward, and says that teams for 
carrying goods and siipplies ran frequently and regularly to and 
from Fishkill. It was, he adds, the most southern of the traveled 
roads at a safe distance from the sea. The following statements 
could not, with him, have been mere traditions, for he had personal 
knowledge of the men who were participants in the events narrated. 
"In the fall of 1777, after the capture of Burgoyne, a detachment of 
the American army with the enemy's splendid train of artillery 
passed through Waterbury to the eastward. They pitched their 
tents and encamped for the night on Manhan meadow, just above 
the bridge. Many people visited the ground to see the beautiful 
brass pieces all ranged in line. Gen. La Fayette at one time, 
attended only by his aids, lodged at the house of Capt. Isaac Bron- 
son — at Break Neck — who then kept tavern. The host introduced 
him to his best chamber in which was his best bed, but La Fayette 
caused the feather bed to be removed, saying : " Straw for the sol- 
dier," and made the straw underbed his couch for the night. He 
also on one occasion stopped at the house of Esq. (Joseph) Hopkins, 
then "the most prominent civilian in the place." Dr. Bronson also 
confirms the statement — made elsewhere, that General Washington 
passed through Waterbury on his way to Hartford. He makes 
mention of Gen. Knox as being with him, but does not speak of La 
Fayette, who was of the party. "The splendid retinue " is referred 
to as "a somewhat numerous escort." He adds that General Wash- 
ington rode a chestnut colored horse, came across Break Neck, and 
returned the salutations of the boys by the roadside. His dig- 
nity of manner, set off by his renown, made a durable impression 
on all who beheld him. He dined with Esq. Hopkins, who made 
many inquiries, and at last became decidedly inquisitive. After 
reflecting a little on the last cpiestion, Washington is said to have 
said: "Mr. Hopkins, can you keep a secret ?" "lean." " So can 
I," the General instantly replied. 

The passage of the French Army through our town in 17 81, or 
in 1782, was marked by an encampment on Break Neck hill where it 
remained over one day to wash and bake. In consequence, all the 
wells in the neighborhood were drawn dry, and the French army 
had an opportunity to test the quality of the water in Hop brook. 
In 1 781 the same army, impeded in its march to the westward by 



WATERS URY IN THE REVOLUTION. 455 

rain and freshets,* encamped two or three days in Southing'ton. 
The place of its encampment at that time is well established, as 
well as that of a second encampment of the same army on French 
hill in the same town. The rows of "white washed" Sabbath Day 
houses were of interest to the Frenchmen, who thought them the 
remains of a military encampment. f 

The first recorded case of inoculation \, for small pox in Water- 
bury was performed by Charles Upson in February, 1782 — the 
patient being Ezra Mallory, who was taken care of three weeks 
by Wait Hotchkiss. Almost simultaneou.sly with this case, the town 
gave, during forty-eight days, permission to all males in the town 
over ten years of age, and to all persons living on the east and west 
Continental road, "to take the infection of small pox by way of 
inoculation." A committee was appointed of fifteen men ("the Rev. 
Mr. Mark Leavenworth " being one) whose duty it was " to give 
orders respecting the time when the infection should be taken, the 
house or houses where the patients should live, the tendance, the 
time of their cleansing and the time of their release from restric- 
tions — and to take whatever precautions should be deemed expedi- 
ent for preserving the inhabitants from taking the infection." A 
few days later, it was ordered that the latest day for inoculation 
should be March 20th instead of April ist. Cases of inoculation for 
the disease that gave such distress and trouble to the soldiers in 
camp, and the inhabitants of towns everywhere, wxre frequent 
before the time when in 1784, Dr. Abel Bronson petitioned the town 
to name a place "healthy, convenient and secure" where he might 
build a house to receive patients for inoculation. Under suitable 
restrictions, the consent of the town was gained, and Dr. Abel Bron- 
son established a hospital for that purpose, in Middlebury. The 
only portion of the building which remains is a single door, which 
was removed to a house occupied by the late Burritt Hall. It is 
covered with the names of patients who there endured the pains 
and penalties of inoculation. Of the number are " Sheldon Malary, 
Ezekiel Birdsey, Sam" D. H., Huntington, April 24, 1792; Jared 
Munson, Harry Edwards, Richard Skinner, Alfred Edwards, Samuel 
Wheeler, John Newton, of Washington, 1795; H. Marshall, Asa 
Green, Macomber Allis, Johnson, 23; Samuel vSouthmayd, Jr., Hodly, 
Clark, Sheldon Clark, Leavit T. Harris, and John Gilcrist." Two 



*This detention may account for an item in our tuwn accounts of " Soldiers that worked at the [Great 
River] bridge." 

+ History of Southington. 

:!: Charles Upson was perhaps the first man to name a child Washington, which he did as early as Sep- 
tember, 1775. His second child was named Gates, his third child was named Lee. 



4 -5 BISTORT OF WATERBURY. 

sons of Nathaniel Gnnn (Enos and Abel), who had, it is said, 
received commissions in the British army with the condition that 
they should be protected from small pox by inoculation, went, it is 
said, to Dr. Bronson's and died there from exposure.* 

Of the many traditions which have bepn kept alive concerning- 
events occurring in Waterbury, the following are well authenti- 
cated. In Union City, on the east side of the river, there is stand- 
ing a house that was built by Thomas Porter before the war, and 
was occupied as a tavern during the war. To this house there came 
on one occasion so many soldiers that they completely filled every 
room. So weary were the men that they fell upon the floors, 
exhausted, for want of rest and sleep. All night Mrs. Porter and 
her attendants cooked for these men, stepping over them as they 
worked. 

Mention should also be made of the heroism of Huldah Warner, 
a granddaughter of the first wo:nan who was buried in Naugatuck. 
vShe was at that time the wife of Samuel Williams, and was, with 
two of her children, in Wyoming. The night before the massacre 
at that place, her husband, through the aid of their elder son, 
Zebah, contrived to get word to her to flee at once. With her 
daughter, Rhoda, and a still younger child, Mrs. Williams began 
her flight for her former home in Waterbury. She left Wyom- 
ing the same night. The next day she made but five miles, 
and spent the night without shelter of any kind. Continuing 
her flight from day to day (not knowing- that her husband was slain 
during the first night of her journey), she reached Waterbury and 
the house of her sister Elizabeth, the wife of Zebulon vScott. We 
find in November of 1778, Zebulon Scott credited by the town with 
keeping Widow Williams and two children four months and a half. 
One of the two children, Rhoda, became, it is said, the grandmother 
of 95 children. Zeruah, the only daughter of Lieut. Jonathan Beebe, 
of the same section of the township, hearing that her husband, 
Israel Terrel, was ill in camp, took her infant child, Israel, and rode 
alone to the Hudson river, and there cared for him until his 
recovery. 

Joseph Root was one of the force under Col. Stark at Benning- 
ton. The night before the battle he was on duty as sentinel. Near 



*The following advertisement is taken from The Connecticut Journal, published at New Haven: 

INOCULATION. 

Any Person desirous of taking the infection of the Small Pox, may be well accommodated by applying 
to the subscriber, who has a very convenient house for that purpose, where careful attendance is given, and 
every favor gratefully acknowledged, by their humble servant. 

Abel Bronson. 
IVatt-r/mry, Sc/t. /S, nqs. lo W. 



WATERBURY IN THE REVOLUTION. 457 

morning, as he and his comrade were nearing each other on their 
respective beats, there rose tip a platoon of British soldiers who 
demanded surrender. Upon this both sentinels discharged their 
pieces, whereupon the whole company fired, killing Root's comrade 
and felling Root to the ground. He soon rallied, to find that he 
was only shot through his hat, when he surrendered. He was 
finally exchanged, and it was with great pride that the old gentle- 
man of 80 years said (to Mr. Laurel Beebe, who gave the incident 
to the writer), that the Americans gave two Hessian prisoners in 
exchange for him. 

Ebenezer Richardson, a man who loved the wilderness, and 
moved into it anew whenever neighbors came into view — went at 
last to live at Break Neck. This was before the name Middlebury 
had been spoken for that territory. His granddaughter, Tamar 
Richardson, lived with her father and mother, during the war, at 
Break Neck. Of her, her granddaughter Mrs. Gilbert Hotchkiss 
has written: " Many times has my grandmother told me of the sol- 
diers of the Revolution passing her father's house on the way to 
and from Boston and Fishkill, stopping there for provisions or stay- 
ing over night, or both, and always keeping a guard. She told how 
she and her mother would bake all day as fast as they could, one 
ovenfull after another, the soldiers taking the pies as fast as they 
could bake them, and how her arms have been burned from the 
heat of the brick oven — and that with weary feet and aching limbs 
the only way to get to her room was to walk over the soldiers who 
lay thick upon the floor." After a life of 94 years, this woman was 
committed to the earth, in trust for the Resurrection, in the Grand 
street cemetery, and upon her grave-stone was inscribed (until the 
city of Waterbury served upon the dead a summary process of dis- 
possession)* the following words : " Tamar, wife of Stephen Hotch- 
kiss, died Mar. 29, 1853 JE. 94 >^ y'rs." 

Dear pilgrim farewell, thy journey is ended, 
Thou hast gone to thy rest in the temple of God, 

Hast seen the dear Lord who for thee descended 
To take thee at length to his blessed abode. 

The following list of persons who "left Waterbury during the 
Revolutionary War, with the intention of joining the enemy " was 
made by Dr. Bronson, and is reproduced here. Certain of the names 
appear in our list of soldiers, their owners having served in the 

* In 1890 the City of Waterbury decided that it had no longer room for the graves of the men 
and women whose part was no insignificant one in giving to the world the "Thirteen United States." Scores 
of the six hundred and eighty-nine soldiers who stood for Waterbury in the American army, lay within 
that ground. Corporations sometimes commit, as in this instance, the unpardonable sin. 



458 



HIS TO B Y OF WA TERB UR Y. 



American army, and also as pensioners at a later date. Renewed 
investigation might materially add to or change the record as it 
here stands. 



John Baxter; returned to Waterbury. 
Daniel Benham. 

Asa Blakeslee; left Waterbury Dec. 4. 
1776. His father, David, who encour- 
aged him to go, was assessed for the 
support of a soldier in the American 
army, but died before the tax was col- 
lected. [Asa is said to have removed 
to Nova Scotia.] 
John Blakeslee; died on Long Island 

while with the British. 
Zealous Blakeslee. [There was a pen- 
sioner of that name, who enlisted in 
1776.] 
Bela Bronson; left Waterbury Dec. 10, 
1776. His personal estate was confis- 
cated. He died on Long Island with 
the British. 
David Brown; son of Daniel, died with 

the British in New York. 
Capt. Hezekiah Brown. 
Levi Brown; died with the British. [En- 
listed from Milford in 1778.] 
Zera Brown; son of Capt. Hezekiah. He 
went away with his father in 1776, and 
joined the enemy on Long Island. 
The father died, and the son "con- 
vinced of his error," returned to Water- 
bury and gave himself up to the civil 
authority. He was fined by the Supe- 
rior Court ;^30, and ordered not to 
leave the town. In 17S3, he presented 
a petition for a discharge — that he 
might labor for the support of his 
mother in Watertown, which was not 
granted. 
Noah Cande; estate confiscated. 
Samuel Doolittle; estate confiscated. 
James Doolittle; estate improved for the 

benefit of the State. 
John Dowd; joined the enemy at the 
age of fifteen years; was ordered to 
go South and was there taken pris- 
oner. He was confined in jail fifteen 
months in Pennsylvania. His father, 
Jacob, brought a petition to the As- 
sembly, saying that his son was 



seduced away, and was then willing 
to serve his country. He desired that 
his son might have liberty to return 
home. The request was granted, bonds 
to be given for good behavior. 

Samuel Dowd. [Deserted to the Amer- 
icans, Nov. 7, 1778] 

j\Ioses Dunbar. 

Elihu Grilley, \ sons of Jehula; both died 

Daniel Grilley, S with the British. 

Dan Finch; returned before the close of 
the war. 

[Reuben Finch.] 

William Finch. 

Capt. Abraham Hickox. [In 1773 (ac- 
cording to an attested copy of the orig- 
inal writ), Capt. Hickox was made 
Deputy Sherifl: under Jonathan Fitch, 
Esq. Capt. Welton and Eleazer Prin- 
dle gave bonds for him to the amount 
of ;^2,ooo. December 12, 1776, they 
attached property of Capt. Hickox 
(including the old Greystone mill) " at 
the falls of Hancox brook: 14 acres 
with a house and barn and Grist mill 
upon it." Also 150 acres "bounded 
north on Mount Taylor, and a highway 
that Goeth to Buck's Hill," containing 
his dwelling house and barns; 50 acres 
"on the Island Rocks; land at Rich- 
ard's corner, and 10 acres at the north 
end of INIount Taylor, together with his 
farm ]K-oduce of every kind and his 
cattle — the marks being given.] He 
left Jan. 10, 1776, entered the British 
army; was ordered south in 1779, and 
was finally killed in battle. He had 
been a deputy sheriff in Waterbury, 
and his property was improved for the 
benefit of the State. 
Darius Hickox; returned, and married in 
Waterbury. [Served on the Continen- 
tal side in 1779 and 1780.] 
Joel Hickox (son of Abraham). He went 
to Long Island with his father in 1776, 
and on his separation from him made a 
cruise in the boating service, was taken 



WATERS URT IJ^ THE REVOLUTION. 



459 



prisoner, and confined in Newgate for 
not pleading to the indictment; he 
claiming the right of exchange as a 
British subject. When the prison was 
broken open, he escaped to Long Is- 
land, whence he returned in ten days, 
having released an American prisoner. 
He then brought a petition to the Gen- 
eral Court, in which he confessed his 
error, and asked to be released. He 
was required to give a bond of £iSo for 
good behavior and appearance at Court, 
— he to remain in Waterbury. 

Reuben Hickox; returned, and then re- 
moved to Nova Scotia. 

William Hickox. 

Daniel Killum; died with the British. 

William Maningirrous; estate confiscated. 

David Manvil; joined the enemy on Long 
Island, served until Nov., 1777, and 
then escaped wnth Jesse Tuttle and 
Epha Warner. They w^ere examined 
by Gen. Parsons, and received from 
him a pass to return home. They were 
then committed to goal, but were after- 
ward suffered to go at large. One of 
them enlisted into the American ser- 
vice. They brought a petition to the 
Assembly, in which they asked pardon 
and prayed that their furniture might 
be restored to them. The request was 
granted. 

Mead Merrell. 

[Thomas Merrill]. 

Richard Miles. 

Heman Monson [Hermon Munson]; de- 
serted from the British service. A pros- 
ecution against him was dismissed 
March, 1778. 

Daniel Nichols; died with the British, 1776. 

William Nichols; estate confiscated. He 
went to Nova Scotia after the war, and 
there died. 

Ashael Parker; returned to Waterbury. 

Elisha Parker; died with the British of 
smallpox. 



John Parker; died with the British. 

John Porter. 

Timothy Porter; returned and took the 
oath of fidelity to the State. 

Elihu Prichard; died wath the British. 

Eliphalet Prichard of Northbury; re- 
turned after the war. 

Thomas Prichard; died with the British. 

Eli Rowley; deserted from the British. 

Elijah Scott. 

Noah Scott. 

Timothy Scovill; returned and enlisted 
into the American army. 

Isaac Shelton; returned. 

William Seeley; returned. 

Jesse Tuttle. 

Aaron Warner; retin-ned. 

David Warner, son of Aaron: returned. 

Epha Warner; took the oath of fidelity 
in Dec, 1777. 

•) brothers; were taken 
lustus Warner, f ,, , 

,r , -r-rr - <^i^ the wav and 

Mark Warner, \ , ,.1 / 

' brought back. 

Seth Warner; deserted to the British. 

Eben Way; returned. 

Titus Way; left Dec. 4, 1776. After the 
w'ar, he went to Nova Scotia. 

AmasaWelton; remained with the Brit- 
ish but a short time; returned and took 
the oath of fidelity. 

Arad Welton; went to the South and 
there married. 

Ezekiel Welton; estate confiscated; re- 
turned after the war and removed to 
Nova Scotia. 

Noah Welton. 

Stephen Welton; returned and was the 
first to take the oath of fidelity. 

1 sons of Eliakim. One 
died in New York. 



Benoni Welton, 
Moses Welton, 



and the other while 
I serving in l^ur- 
J goyne's army. 
Daniel Wooster. 

Oliver Welton. He was convicted of try- 
ing to enlist* Joel Roberts into the ene- 



* Of this Joel Roberts, the following story is told : He was very ill with "camp distemper," and death 
seemed so imminent that his comrades dug his grave. Joel Cook and Capt. Camp were w-ith him to watch 
over his last moments. Roberts was past the power of speech, when Cook and Camp fell asleep. When 
they awoke. Cook cried out: "Where is that camphor?" A pint bottle of camphor had disappeared. 
"Took it," whispered Roberts. "Then you are a dead man," exclaimed Cook. "Bet-ter," whispered 
Roberts, and he soon recovered. 



460 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



my's service. 



After the war, as his 



conviction rested on Roberts's testi- 
mony alone, he petitioned the Assem- 
bly to discharge him from the execu- 
tion. The prayer was granted, but 



afterwards the vote was reconsidered 
and negatived. The next year (17S6), 
on petition, he had liberty to pay in 
" State securities." 



The following list of 689 names of men who served as soldiers 
in the war in some one of the various military organizations of the 
State, or in the Continental army, has been made from original 
documents held as private papers: from War papers in the vState 
archives; from Bronson's "History of Waterbury," and from the 
"Record of Connecticut men in the War of the Revolution." Dr. 
Bronson had a list of 236 natnes, which he referred to as "very 
incomplete." 

Every one of the persons included in this list was born in Water- 
bury, enlisted from Waterbury, or lived in the township. In a case 
like that of Capt. Jesse Leavenworth, son of the Rev. Mark Leaven- 
worth, although he enlisted from New Haven, it has been thought 
to be quite just to claim him, and although Aner Bradley when 
wotmded at Danbury, was not yet resident here, but later removed 
into Ancient Waterbury, he and other men under similar circum- 
stances have been laid claim to. In the list may be found three 
lieutenant-colonels, three majors, thirty-four captains, and twenty- 
three lieutenants. 

REVOLUTIONARY SOLDIERS. 



James Adams, 
John Adams, 
Luke Adams, 
Sylvanus Adams, 
Asa Alcox, 
Daniel Alcox, 
David Alcox, 
John B. Alcox, 
Samuel Alcox, 
Solomon Alcox, 
Abel Allen, 
Daniel Allen, 
Ebenezer Allen, 
Gideon Allen, 
John Ames, 
Samuel Ames, 
Ethan Andrews, 
James Andrews, 



■Timothy Andrews, 
Lieut. Wm. Andrews, 
Joseph Atkins, Jr., 
Josiah Atkins,* 
Josiah Atkins, f 
Samuel Atkins, 
Thomas Atwell,^ 
Abel Bacheldor, 
Josiah Bacon, 
Ichabod Bailey, 
Clark Baird, 
Abel Baldwin, 
Alsop Baldwin, 
Benjamin Baldwin, 
David Baldwin, 
Dr. Isaac Baldwin, 
Lieut. Col. Jonathan 
Baldwin, 



Josiah Baldwin, 

Ens. Theoph. Baldwin, 

Eliel Barker, 

Isaac Barker, 
^_ Jonathan Barker, 

Asa Barnes, 

" Azer Barnes, Con- 
ductor, 1779-81." 

Benjamin Barnes, 

Daniel Barnes, died 
March 30, 177S. 

Jsaac Barnes, 

John Barnes, 

Josiah Barnes, 

Capt. Nathaniel 
Barnes, 

Samuel Barnes, 

Thaddeus Barnes, Jr. 



* Probably son of Joseph. 
+ Son of Josiah. See his Diary, p. 472. 

:j: Enlisted in Sheldon's Light Dragoons, 1777. Description: Farmer; stature, 5 ft. S in.; light complexion, 
hair and eves. 



WATEBBUBT IN THE BEVOLUTION. 



Revolntionary Soldiers — continued. 



Philip Barret, d. April 

22, I77S. 

Samuel Bartholomew, 

William Basset, 

Benjamin Bates, 

Asa Beach, 

John Beach, missing 
Sept. 15, 1776. 
■s' Joseph Beach, Jr., 

Thaddens Beach, 

Dr. Ebenezer Beards- 
ley,* 

David Beebe, / 

Eli Beebe, 

Elisha Beebe, 

Ephraim Beebe, 

Capt. Ira Beebe, 

Joseph Beebe, 

Martin Beebe, 

Reuben Beebe, f 

Seba Beebe, enlisted 
in Vermont. 

Walter Beecher, 

David Bell or Ball, 
Watertown, 17S1. 

Benjamin Bement, 

Lieut. Aaron Bene- 
dict, 

Elihu Benham, 

Elisha Benham, 

Lieut. Isaac Benham, 

Samuel Benham, 

Thomas Blake, 

Amasa Blakeslee, 



Archibald Blakeslee, 

Asa Blakeslee (des.) 

David Blakeslee, died 
at Albany. 

Enos Blakeslee, d. 
Sept. 3, 1776. 

Lieut. James Blakes- 
lee? 

Jared Blakeslee, 

Joel Blakeslee, 



^ John Blakeslee, 



Obed Blakeslee, black- 
smith, dark, stat- 
ure, 5, 8. 

Zealous Blakeslee, 

Joseph Boardman, 

Andrew Bostwick, 
blacksmith, light, 
stature, 5, 7. 

Aner Bradley, wound- 
ed at Danbury. 

Stephen Brister, 

Giles Brocket, 

Abel Bronson, 

Asahel Bronson, 

Daniel Bronson, 

Dr. Isaac Bronson, 
surgeon's mate in 
Sheldon's Light Dra- 
goons, 

Capt. Isaac Bronson, 

Joseph Bronson, 

Josiah Bronson, Jr., 

Levi Bronson, 



Lieut. Michael Bron- 
son, 
Reuben Bronson, 
Roswell Bronson, 
Capt. Samuel Bronson, 
Selah Bronson, 
Titus Bronson, - 
David Brown, ^ 
Ebenezer Brown, 
James Brown, 
Benajah Bryan, 
David Buckingham, 
Epinetus Buckingham, 
Isaac Bunnell, 
Jonathan Butler, 
Solomon Butler, 
Lieut. Daniel Bying- 

ton, 
Jared Byington, 
Samuel Byington, 
Robert Cady ? 
Israel Calkins, 
Roswell Calkins, 
.Abel Camp, \ 
Bethel Camp, I bro's. 
Eldad Camp, ) 
Ephraim Camp, 
Capt. Samuel Camp, - 
Samuel Camp, Jr.,. ^ 
Cuff Capeny,|: 
Stephen Carter, 
Thomas Cartwright, 
Bradley Castle, 
Capt. Phineas Castle, 



*" Ebenezer Beardslee, Surgeon," itts-t], is accredited to Bridgeport, but he paid taxes here from 1769 
to 1776, inclusive. 

+ In Beebe's application for a pension, he states that " when General Washington retreated (from Long 
Island, 1776), Col. Douglass's regiment was the last one to leave the Island;" that he was discharged Dec. 
1776, and on his return to Waterbury " joined a company of minute men, commanded by Capt. [Josiah] 
Terrell, and was out two short tours at Stamford and New Haven; continued as a 'minute man' for two 
years — the company being composed of 60 men and called the Ring-bone company." 

$The following is his will: Being engaged in the war for the defense of America, and exposed to the 
dangers thereof; I give to Stephen Bronson, £10, to be paid out of a note this day given me by Simeon 
Nichols. I give to Moses Cook £6, to be paid by a note executed by sd. Cook and sd. Bronson. I give to 
Asa Hopkins my caster Hatt. I give to Joseph Hopkins, Jr., ray beaver Hatt. I give to Joseph Hopkins, 
Esq., all the remainder of my estate, whether in clothing, notes of hand, or wages due to me, on this condi- 
tion — that he, the sd. Joseph Hopkins, shall pay to my friend Timothy a Negro man living with Isaac 
Newton the sum of five pounds, and to Silence, a servant of the sd. Joseph Hopkins, the sum of five pounds. 
I appoint Joseph Hopkins to be executor. 

CUFF CAPENY, 

Theodore Wadsworth, I .. 

)■ witnesses. 



Levia Hopkins, 



This will, dated June 2, 1777, was probated Dec. 13, 1777. 



462 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



Revohdionary Soldiers— con 
Silas Chapman, 
Daniel Chatfield, 
Thomas Chilman, 
Asa Chittenden, at 

Horseneck. 
Asahel Chittenden, 
Daniel Clark, 
Richard Clark, 
X Ens. Timothy Clark, 
John AUin Clay, 
Isaac Cleveland, 
Johnson Cleveland, 
Israel Clifford, 
John Cobb, 
John Cole, 
Thomas Cole, 
Major Augustus Col- 
lins, 27th Reg. Mili- 
tia, May, 1782. 
Dr. Roger Conant, 
surgeon with Col. 
Fisher Gay, June, 
1776; died Feb.S, 1777. 
x,^ Arba Cook, 
'^ Charles Cook, 
Ebenezer Cook, 
Joel Cook, 

Lemuel Cook, last sur- 
vivor of the war, 
Moses Cook, drummer, 
Ozem Cook, 
Roswell Cook, 
Selah Cook, farmer, 5, 

7^, dark, 
Timothy Cook, 
Trueworthy Cook, 
Uri Cook, 
^Villiam Cook, son of 

Charles, 
Toto Cornelius, at 

Horseneck, 
Amos Culver, 
Reuben Culver, 



ihi lied. 

Benjamin Curtis, d. 
Nov. 15, 1776. 

Caleb Curtis, 

Lieut. Eli Curtis, 

Elihu Curtis, 

Felix Curtis, 

Lieut. Giles Curtis, . 

Isaac Curtis, 

James Curtis, 

Capt. Jesse Curtis, 

"Major," on Town ace. 
book, 1780. 

Capt. Jotham Curtis, 

L^-man Curtis, 

Samuel Curtis, 

Stephen Curtis, 3d, 

Zadoc Curtis, 

Zerah Curtis, Water- 
town, farmer, 5, 8i4, 

Joseph Cutler, 

lYounglove Cutler, 

Ebenezer D arrow, 
shoemaker, 5, 7, 

Jonathan Davis, 

Stephen Davis (des.), 
( Isaac Dayton, 
' Justus Dayton, 

Michael Dayton, 

Samuel Dayton, , 

Daniel Dean, 

John Dean, d. at Far- 
mingbury, Sept. 28, 
1776, on return from 
y'camp at New York. 
Church record. 

Samuel Dowd, des. 
Nov. 7, 177S, 

Aaron Dunbar, 

Amos Dunbar, 

Edward Dunbar, 

Giles Dunbar, 

James Dunbar, far- 
mer, 5, 10, light. 



Joel Dunbar, 

John Dunbar, 

JosephDunbar, wound- 
ed at (xermantown 
and White Marsh, 
Pa., 1777, 

Miles Dunbar,* 

Lieut. Thomas Dut- 
ton, 

Lieut. Titus Dutton, 

Isaac Edwards, 
^Lieut. Nathaniel Ed- 
wards, prisoner at 
Fort Washington, 
Nov. 16, 1776, 

John Eggieston, 

Surgeon John Elton, 

Ebenezer Elwell, 

Ozias Elwell, 

Samuel Elwell, 

Randol Evans, 

John Fallendon(or Tat- 
tendon), 

Ithiel Fancher, 

James Fancher, 

John Fancher, 

Rufus Farrington(Yar. 
rington, on Family 
Rec), 

Aaron Fenn, 

Ens. Benjamin Fenn., 

Jr.. 
Jacob Fenn, 
Jason Fenn, 
Jesse Fenn, 
John Fenn, 3d, 
Judah Fenn, 
Captain Thomas Fenn, 
Lieut. Nathan Ferrisf 
Edmund Fields, 
David Finch, 
Jeremiah Finch (des.) 

Watertown. 



* Miles Dunbar became fatigued at the battle of Monmouth, and was left. On his way home, was taken 
sick at Newtown. His expenses were paid by the State. 

+ Nathan Ferris was "commissioned ist lieut. in 7th Reg. Conn. Line under Col. Heman Swift, Jan. 
I, 1777; cashiered Oct. 25, for misconduct on the march to Germantown, Oct. 4. He took the oath of allegi- 
ance here after Dec. 8, and in the same month enlisted eleven men, John Ames, Ethan and Timothy And- 
rews, Thomas Chilman, John Cole, Titus Dutton, Elial and Elijah Parker, Isaac and John Smith and 
Thomas Worden. All served under Capt. Elizur (?) Warner. He died in Watertown in 1808, aged 74 yrs. 



WATERS URY IN THE REVOLUTION. 



463 



Revolnttona7-y Soldiers — continued. 




Titus Finch, 

John Fontine, 

Aaron Foot, 

Abel Foot, 

Capt. Abraham Foot, 
spent a part of his 
life here. 

Bronson Foot, 

Daniel Foot (son of 
Nathan). 

David Foot, killed at 
Fairfield. 

David Foot, Jr. (son of 
Samuel). 

Ebenezer Foot, died at 
Horseneck. 

Ira Foot, 

Ozem Foot, 

Capt. Moses Foot, 

Amos Ford, dead in 
Feb. 1777. 

Cephas Ford, 

Noah Fowler, Lieut. 
Col. 28th Reg. Mili- 
tia, May, 1782. 

Joseph Freedom, 

Castor Freeman, 

Robin Freeman, 

Charles Frisbie, 

Ebenezer Frisbie, 

Israel Frisbie, 

Judah Frisbie, 

Reuben Frisbie, 

Elisha Frost, 

Rev. Jesse Frost, en- 
listed in Southing- 
ton. 

Moses Frost, 

Samuel Frost, 

Timothy Frost, 

David Fulford, 

James Fulford, shoe- 
maker, 6 ft, light. 

Lieut. John Fulford, -• 

Noah Fulford, 

Titus Fulford, 



Benjamin Gaylord, 

Jonathan Gaylord, 

Joseph Gaylord, 

Capt Levi Gaylord, 

Benoni Gillet, 

John Glazier, 

Daniel Goodrich, 

Jabez "Goodill," 

Lieut. Enos Granniss, 

James Granniss, died 
at Monmouth after 
amputation of a leg. 

Levi Granniss, 

Benjamin Graves, 

Simeon Graves, 

Paul Griggs, 

Samuel Griggs, 

Solomon Griggs, 

Cyrus Grilley, 

" Philo G r u m s e y, 
Watertown, 1781." 

Chauncey Guernsey, 

Jonathan Guernsey, 

Capt. Joseph Guern- 
sey, was one of the 
guards at Andre's 
execution. 

Southmayd Guernsey, 

Reuben Hale, 
- Benajah Hall, 

Isaah (Isaac ?) Hall 

Jonah Hall, 

Nathaniel Hall, 

"John Hannan, Water- 
town." 

Daniel Harrison, 

Jabez Harrison ? 

John Harrison, 

Ambrose Hi k cox, 

"drummer during 

the year past. May 

20, 1776," 

^Lieut. Amos Hikcox, 

Consider Hikcox, 
Darius Hikcox, 



Elisha Hikcox, 
Gideon Hikcox, 
Capt. James Hikcox, 
Josiah Hikcox, 
Capt. Samuel Hikcox, 
William Hikcox, Jr., 
Ens. Jared Hill, paid 

taxes, 1783, 
Benjamin Hine, 
Hollingsworth Hine, 
Hezekiah Hine,* 
Hezekiah Hine, Jr., 
Reuben Hine, died ^at 

Horseneck, 
Eliakim Hitchcock, 
Zachariah Hitchcock, 
Culpepper Hoadley, 
Ebenezer Hoadley, 
Jude Hoadley, 
Philo Hoadley, 
Silas Hoadley, 
William Hoadley, 
Joseph Hopkins, 
Lemuel Hopkins, 
Samuel Hopkins, 
Abraham Hotchkiss, 
Asahel Hotchkiss, 
Eben Hotchkiss, 
Capt. Gideon Hotch- 
kiss, 
Jesse Hotchkiss, f 
Joel Hotchkiss, 
Joseph Hotchkiss, 
Stephen Hotchkiss, 
Truman Hotchkiss, 
>David Hubbard, 
Benjamin Hull, 
Colwell Hull, 
Ezra Hull, 
James Hull, 
Joseph Hull, 
David Humiston, 
Jared Humiston, farm- 
er, 5. 5- light, red 
hair; enl. 1777, des. 
17S2, 



♦Hezekiah Hine and his seven sons— but not all living in Waterbury— are said, by his descendants, to 
have served in the war. 

tWent to camp to nurse his brother Eben, who had camp-fever, and died from the same disease. 



464 



HISTORY OF WATEEBUEY. 



Revolutionary Soldiers— con 

Jesse Hiimiston, 

Joel Humiston, 

Timothy Humiston, 

1 ) a V i d Hungerford, 
enl. June 28; pris- 
oner Nov. 16, 1776; 
died Jan. 29, i777- 

lames Hungerford, 
Xjedediah Hyde ? 

Lieut. Lazarus Ives, 

Caleb Johnson, 

Levi Johnson, 

Samuel Johnson (des.) 

John Jordan, 

Allyn Judd, 

Balmarine Judd, 

Brewster Judd, 

Chandler Judd, 

Daniel Judd, 

Demas Judd, confined 
in the prison-ship, 
Jersey. 
'' Ebenezer Judd ? 

Freeman Judd, lost a 
gun in the Quebec 
expedition. 

" Immanuel Jiidd, 
died Apr. rQ, 1778." 

Joel Judd, d. Apr. 5, 

1779- 
.John Judd, farmer, 5, 

S, dark. 
Levi Judd, 
Richard Judd, 
Lieut. Samuel Judd, 
-!- Stephen Judd, 
Thomas Judd, 
Walter Judd, 
William Judd, 
Martin Kellogg, 
John J. Kenea, taxed 

in 1784. 



^ 



fiftiied. 

.Samuel Kimball, 

Joel Lane, 

Nathaniel Lane, 

Richard Lawrence, 
tailor, 5, g. 

C a p t. Asa Leaven- 
worth, 

Capt. Jesse Leav- 
enworth, 

Mark Leaven- 
worth, Secre- 
tary and assist- 
ant Adjutant- 
gen, to G e n. 
Wooster. 

Nathan Leaven- 
-w o r t h , Sur- 
geon's mate, 
8th reg. " Mass 
Line'' from 
Feb., 17S0, to 
close of the 
war. See "Yale 
in the Revolu- 
tion, 188S." 

Samuel Leavenworth, 

Caleb Lewis. 

" Clear Lewis," * 

David Lewis, 

Capt. John Lewis, 

Capt. John Lewis, Jr., 

Joseph Lewis, 

Samuel Lewis, Jr., 
Northbury. 

Silas Lewis, 

Joel Lines, 

Isaac Livingston, 

Joseph Loomis? 

Josiah Lounsbury,f 

Aaron Luddington, 

Abraham Ludding- 
ton ? 



Luman Luddington, 
d. Oct. ig, 1776, 

John Major (des.), 

Daniel Mallory, 

Jonah Mallory, 

Timothy Mann," hired 
for a two months' 
Tower of Duty," 

1779- 
Levi Marks, 
Philip Martin, 
Aaron Matthews, 
Amos Matthews, 
Jesse Matthews, 
Capt. Stephen ]\Iat- 

thews, X 
Amasa Mattoon, 
John Merchant, 
Thomas ^Merchant, Jr , 
Ens. Isaac Merriam, 
Jesse Merriam (or 

Merriman). 
Joel Merriam, 
Ichabod Merrill, 
Nathaniel Merrill, 
Charles Merriman, 

Water town — d r u m 

major. 
Moses Michael (Mitch- 
ell?) 
Timon Miles, 
Zebulon Miller, at 

Horseneck. 
Giles ]\Iingo, 
Dan Miner, 
Joseph Miner, 
Amos Mix, 
.^.Eldad Mix, 

Levi Mix, 
.- Samuel Mix, 
Titus Mix, killed Sept. 

16, 1776. 



* Erroneously given as " Caleb" in " Family Records." No other record. 

+ "Died in the Camp at Boston, Josiah Lownsberry, 'Prentice to Asa Levenworth, February 24, 1776." 
— Timothy Jud(f s Record. 

$ Under date of Julys, '776, Stephen Matthews advertises in the Connecticut Joui-ncxl^ New Haven: 
" Deserted from my company in Col. Swift's Battalion, Frederick Barene, an Irishman, a thick, well set 
fellow, wears his own black Hair, is pitted with the Small Po.\, says he lately lived near Boston, and formerly 
lived at Hartford; has left a Wife and Child in Woodbury. 'Tis said he has since listed in another Com- 
pany." " Five Dollars Reward" is offered for his capture and confinement in Goal, " that he may be dealt 
with." 



WATEBBUBT IN THE BEVOLUTION. 



465 



Revolutionary Soldiers — continued. 



Nathaniel Morris, 

Linus Moss, 

Joseph Munn, negro. 

Benjamin Munson, 

Elisha Munson, 

Heman Munson, 

Isaac Munson, 

Samuel Munson, 

Noah jMurray, 

Lemuel Nichols, 

Cyrus Norton, 

Zebal Norton, 

Moses Noyes, 

Abijah Osborn, 

Ebenezer Osborn ? 

Elijah Osborn, 

Joshua Osborn, 

Lot Osborn, 

Samuel Palmer, 

Jonathan Pardee, 

Aaron Parker, killed 
at Horseneck. 

Eliab Parker, 

Elijah Parker, 

Elisha Parker, 
^=-Isaac Parker, 
^John Parker, "died in 

camp." 
■'Ensign Samuel 
Parker, 

Augustus Peck, 

Benjamin Peck, 

Isaac Peck, drowned 
while in service. 

Joseph Peck, died of 
camp fever, 

Ward Peck, 

Capt. Daniel Pendle- 
ton,* 

Isaac Pendleton, 

Jesse Penfield, farmer, 
5,8. 

Lieut. Samuel Pen- 
field, 



Lemuel " Pete " (Pe- 
ters, negro). 

Hezekiah Phelps, 

Richard Pitts, d. Aug. 
6, 1S19. 

Gideon Piatt, 

Barnabas Pond, 

Bartholomew Pond, 

Beriah Pond, 

Ira Pond, 

Moses Pond, 

Munson Pond, killed at 
Horseneck. 

Lieut. Timothy Pond, 

Lieut. Ashbel Porter, 

Ebenezer Porter, 

Eldad Porter, 

Ezra Porter, 

Ezekiel Porter, at 
Horseneck. 

Ens. James Porter, 

Joseph Porter, 

Maj. Phineas Porter, 

Capt. Samuel Porter, 

Truman Porter, 

Ambrose Potter, 

Daniel Potter, 

Eliakim Potter, 

Lake Potter, 

Lemuel Potter, 

Samuel Potter, d. Nov. 

15. 1777- 

James Power, 

Amasa Preston, 

Hachaliah Preston, 
missing Sept. 15, 
1776. 

Jonathan Preston, 

Joseph Pribble, 

Samuel Pribble, bom- 
bardier, 

Amos Prichard, 

Benjamin Prichard, 

George Prichard, ; 



George Prichard, Jr., 
Isaiah Prichard, 
Lieut. Jabez Prichard, 
had removed to Der- 
by. 
Jared Prichard, 
/Joseph Prichard, died 
at Saybrook, 1777. 
Nathaniel Prichard, 
David Punderson, 
Nicholas Ransom, 
Theophilus Ransom, 
Eliatha Rew, resided 

here, 1 768-1 774. 
Capt. Sam Reynolds, 
Lieut. Col. Benjamin 

Richards, 
Ebenezer Richards, 
Mark Richards, 
Samuel Richards, 
Abiel Roberts, Jr., 
Gideon Roberts, 
^^Joel Roberts, 

Jonathan Roberts,! 
Seth Roberts, 
Josiah Rogers, 
Joseph Root, 
Samuel Root, 
Eli Rowley (des.) 
Elijah Royce, 
Capt.Nehemiah Royce 

(sometimes Rice). 
Phineas Royce, 
Samuel Royce, 
Riverius Russell, 
Amos Sanford, 
Archibald Sanford, 
Lieut. Daniel Sanford, 
^a,Ezekiel Sanford, 
Joel Sanford, 
Jonah Sanford, 
Moses Sanford, 
Zacheus Sanford, 
Asa Sawyer, 



* " Captain Pendleton's Company of Artificers, wholly raised in Connecticut, was the only body of men 
from the State that served south of Virginia during the Revolution.'' At least twenty of its men were from 
Waterbury. 

+ Lieut. Jonathan Robbards died Dec. 9, 1775, with a mortification in his leg, says " Timothy Judd's re- 
cord of deaths in Westbury." He evidently was not tliis Jonathan. 



466 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



Revolutionary Soldiers— con 

John Saxton, 

Nathaniel Scarrett, 

Amasa Scott, farmer, 
5, ID, light. 

Caleb Scott, 
, Ebenezer Scott, 

Elijah Scott, 

Enos Scott, (1. Sept. 
29, 177S. 

Ethiel Scott, 

Capt. Ezekiel Scott 
(Major?) 

Ezekiel Scott (private). 

Gershom Scott, Jr., 
'Stephen Scott, 

Tri Scott, 
_iVolsey Scott, 

Amasa Scovill, 

John Scovill, 

Ens. Samuel Scovill, 

Selah Scovill, 

Stephen Scovill, 

Timothy Scovill, 

John Sea , 

Simeon Sears, 

Jeremiah Selkrig, 

Nathan Seward, 

Daniel Seymour, 

Joash Sej^mour, 

Capt. Josiah Seymour ? 

Capt. Stephen Sey- 
mour, 

Z a d o c k Seymour, 

"Shelton, negro." 

Edmund Sherman, 

Ens. John Slater, 

Allen Smith, 

Anthony Smith, 

Daniel Smith, 

Major David Smith, 

Elijah Smith, 

Isaac Smith, 

James Smith, 

Job Smith, 

Joel Smith, 

John Smith, 

Levi Smith, 



tinned. 

Lue Smith, 

Samuel Smith, 

Tabor Smith, 

Patrick Snow, 

Dr. Daniel Southmayd, 
was living m Middle- 
town. 

"William vSouthmayd,* 

" Anod Spincer," 

Ansel Spencer, 

Elihu Spencer, 

Elisha Spencer, 

Selden Spencer, 

Elijah Steele, 

Rev. Andrew Storrs, 
chaplain loth militia 
Reg., at Fishkill, 
Oct., 1777. 

Ens. John Stoddard, 

Samuel Stow, 

Elisha Street, 

David Strickland, 

Capt. Sam. Strickland, 

Abel Sutliff, 

John Sutliff, 

Ichabod Talmage, 

John Tattenden, Re- 
ported dead in 17 78, 
but returned and re- 
ceived his bounty 
after that date. > 

David Taylor, 

Theodor Taylor, 

Amos Terrell, 

Elihu Terrell, 

Enoch Terrell, 

Ichabod Terrell, 

Isaac Terrell, 

Israel Terrell, 

Jared Terrell, 

Joel Terrell, 

Capt. Josiah Terrell, 

Oliver Terrell, -y 

Thomas Terrell, 

Asa Thayer, 

Samuel Thomas, 

James Thompson, 



^-7 John Thompson, Jr., 
Stephen Thompson, 
Elnathan Thrasher, 
Amos Tinker, 
John Tinker, 
Ira Tompkins, 
Solomon Tompkins, 
Solomon Trumbull, 
prisoner at Fort 
Washington , died 
(1776?). 
" John Trumbull's ne- 
gro," f 
WilliamTrumbull(with 
Waterbury soldiers) 
Jesse Turner, 
William Turner, 
Ezekiel Tuttle, 
Hezekiah Tuttle, 
Jabez Tuttle, 
Capt. Lucius Tuttle, 
Timothy Tuttle, 
Abraham Tyler, 
Benjamin Up.son, 
Ezekiel Upson, 
Jesse Upson, 
Noah Upson, farmer, 

5,11, fair. 
.^Stephen Upson, killed 
/'' Sept., 1776. 
Increase Wade, 
Thomas Warden, 
Lieut. James Warner, 
Justus Warner. ♦^ 
Capt. JosejDh Warner, 
Martin Warner, 
Stephen Warner, 
Edward Warren, was 
at the surrender of 
Cornwallis. 
Solomon Waj^, 
Samuel Webb, 
Elijah Weed? 
Jesse Weed, 
David Wells, 
Benjamin Welton ? 
Benoni Welton, 



^ There is an error in the " Family Records" regarding the date of his death. 
+ Was it " Grig," who was " mustered unfit for service, May, 1776." 



He died July 31, 1778. 



WATERS URY IN THE REVOLUTION. 



467 



Revolutionary Soldiers — coji 

Daniel Welton, 

David Welton, 

Elijali Welton, 

James W^elton. 

Job Welton, "died in 
camp." 

Capt. John Welton, 

Josiali Welton, 

Samuel Welton, d. May 
10, 1777, of camp dis- 
temper. 

vShnbael Welton, 

Stephen Welton, 

Stejjhen Welton, Jr., 

Thomas Welton, 3d, 

Josiah Wetmore, 



iinued. 

John Whitney, Water- 
town, farmer, 5, 5, 
dark. 
Philemon Wilcox, 
Bartholomew Williams, 
Daniel Williams, 
Obed Williams, 
Reuben Williams, 
Samuel Williams, 
Aner Wooding, 
Abel Woodruff, 
Edward Woodruff, 
Capt. John Woodruff, 
at Fishkill,i77S — had 
smallpox. 
Jonah Woodruff', 



Lambert Woodruff, 
Samuel Woodruff, 
Abel Woodward, 
John Woodward, 
George Wooldridge, 

Watertown (des.) 
Benjamin Wooster, 
David Wooster, 
Hinman Wooster, 
Moses Wooster, 
Walter Wooster, 
Thomas Word en, 
Abraham Yelles, 

or 
Ambrous Yellis.* 



The following is all that remain.s of Timothy Judd's record of 
deaths of Revolutionary soldiers : 

" died in the Camp 6,1776. Died in New from Captivity dur 

hn Parker, Job Wei Yo .... 

obbards, and John Sea Solomon Trumble & 77 Died in Y 

77 Died in Newtown T. Samuel." 

When the chapter on the French and Indian war was prepared, 
the autograph record of deaths in Westbury made by Timothy 
Judd, had not been seen by the writer. It contains the following 
names of persons who died "in camp," or "in the armv:" 



July 22, 175S. Died in 
the camp at Lake 
George, Mr. David 
Hungerford. 

Aug. 28, 1758. Died in 
the camp at Lake 
George, Samuel 
Richards. 

Sept. 4, 175S. Died 
in the camjD at Lake 
George, Daniel Stow. 

Sept. 5, 1759. Died.Gid- 
eon Robards, in the 
arm}? at Crown Point. 



Sept. 12, 1759. Died, 
Caleb Thomson, in 
the army at Crown 
Point. 

Nov. 14, 1759. Died 
in the camp at Crown 
Point, Bartho. Will- 
iams. 

Dec. 22, 1759. Died, 
William Thomson, 
at Number 4. 

In the summer 1760. 
Died in the camp, 
James Andrus. 



Nov. I, 1760. Died 
this side Green Bush 
in his return from 
the camp, JosejDh 
Blake. 

Aug. 5, 1 76 1. Died at 
Crown Point, Serj: 
John Strickland with 
the Small Pox. 

Died in the Camp at 
Crown Point, No- 
vember, A. D. 1761, 
John Painter, Jun. 



It is with regret that we leave this list of soldiers, and make no 
mention of the individual men who had part in the special scenes 
that marked the closing events of the war. Men are included in 



*"Paid to Abe Yelles his first and second bounty, ^12; paid \.o Ambrous Yellis liis third and fourth 
bounty, ^12." Town treasurer's account book. 



^(38 EISrORY OF WATERBURT. 

this list, who crossed the Hiidson river in June, 1781, from West 
Point and marched to Peekskill and there encamped " on fields of 
corn and grain and meadow," to await the arrival of the same 
French army that passed through Waterbury and tarried to wash 
and bake at Break Neck; men who marched from three o'clock one 
morning to sunrise the next morning with but two hours' rest, and 
then were bidden to advance rapidly to assist the troops who had 
engaged the enemy at Kingsbridge; who set off on the 21st of 
Aucjust, not knowing whither, with boats mounted on carriages and 
soldiers' packs carried on wagons following in the army's train; 
who marched through Princeton — the one hundred front windows 
of whose college building gave light to no student within its walls 
—through Trenton, through Philadelphia, "raising a dust like a 
smothering snow storm," the soldiers inarching in slow and solemn 
step regulated by drum and fife in a line extending nearly two 
miles, the general oiScers duly mounted on "noble steeds elegantly 
caparisoned" — the French army following the next day, "in com- 
plete uniform of white broad-cloth, faced with green; " men who met 
on the Delaware river the express, with the news that a French fleet 
of thirty-six ships of the line and three thousand land forces had 
arrived at the mouth of Chesapeake bay. 

Men included in that list sailed (in some one of the eighty ves- 
sels that were made ready at the head of Elk river) down that 
river, and into Chesapeake bay, and heard at Annapolis (that town 
with a State-house, but no church) the news from Connecticut, of New 
London's grief and Fort Griswold's slaughter. With bows plough- 
ing through the billows they sailed in gales that blew up the mouth 
of the great Potomac, and entered James river, getting as they went 
a view of the grand French fleet, riding at anchor in Chesapeake 
bay; said to be the most noble and majestic spectacle ever seen by 
the American army; they reached the harbor and landed at the 
most ancient English settlement in America (finding but two 
houses on a river bank, where once Jamestown had been); they 
encamped within one mile of the redoubts of the British army, and 
began the siege of Yorktown. 

It was an uneven struggle. Seven thousand Britons shut up in 
a small village with its water-way of fifteen miles completely blocked 
by French ships, and a force of nearly twice their own number lay- 
ing siege to it, commanded by General Washington, Major General 
Lincoln, General Knox, Baron Steuben, General the Count Roch- 
ambeau, and the Marquis de la Fayette. 

Early morning of one day saw red.oubts of the enemy abandoned; 
early morning of another day saw American redoubts that had been 



WATERS URY IN THE REVOLUTION. 469 

thrown up by night; and every day, while cannonading- went on 
from the town, our men labored in the trenches and spent the night 
in creeping nearer the enemy's redoubts. They saw the York river 
strewn with horses, for which Cornwallis had no forage; they met 
the poor negroes, stricken with smallpox, sent out by Cornwallis; 
they beheld, when the batteries were ready to open on the town, 
General Washington put the match to the opening gun that led the 
way for the five days' cannonading, during which " the whole penin- 
sula trembled with the incessant thunderings " of the hundred 
pieces of heavy ordnance; they were near enough to see the awful 
havoc made on Englishmen who manned the lines, by bursting 
shells; they had part in the bayonet assaults made on English 
redoubts, where Colonel Hamilton of Connecticut led the troops, 
and a Wallingford man (John Mansfield), led the "forlorn hope" 
that assaulted the redoubt at the left of the line, while Frenchmen 
attacked that at the right (for numbered with the forces were Ward 
Peck, and Abel Bachelor, and Edward Warren) ; they watched the 
enemy's guns, as one by one they were silenced; they saw the white 
flag as it came out from the beleaguered town; they formed a part 
of the right line of Washington's army (not very neat, not all in 
uniform), as it stretched itself along a mile of roadway, Washington 
at its head; they looked across the roadway at that other line of 
soldiers, Frenchmen, in complete uniform, with Count Rochambeau 
at its head; they listened to the music of the band (stirred by the 
soft timbrel) while awaiting the advance of the captive army of 
Cornwallis, without Cornwallis at its head; they beheld General 
O'Hara in his place, " followed by the conquered troops, as with 
slow and solemn step, with shouldered arms, colors cased, and 
drums beating a British march," they passed between the combined 
armies of the American forces and the French troops to the spa- 
cious field, where each man laid down his arms; they looked on, 
while, divested of every warlike accoutrement, the veteran and 
latewhile victorious army of seven thousand, two hundred and 
forty-seven men was led captive, and under guard, back to York- 
town. 

With this memorable siege and surrender, the stirring activities 
of the war may be said to have closed, but not the actual and 
moving woes and distresses that assailed soldier and inhabitant 
everywhere throughout the thirteen states while awaiting the 
evolution of the perplexing complications that arose at home, and 
in Europe, before peace could be declared on a satisfactory basis. 
It was necessary to keep up the army through two weary winters 
more, and to add recruits, as the men, from inevitable causes, fell 



HISTORY OF WATEBBURY. 

away from the ranks— this condition we have seen exemplified in 
the desperate endeavors made to fill WaterLury's quota in the later 
requisitions made by Connecticut. 

It is with regret that we leave this list of soldiers without a 
record of acts of individual heroism, which we know must have 
taken place among men— many of whom, in the words of Washing- 
ton: Were of the veterans who patiently endured hunger, naked- 
ness and cold; who suffered and bled without a murmur, and who 
with perfect good order retired to their homes without a settlement 
of their accounts, or a farthing of money in their pockets. 

Of the six hundred and eighty-nine men who were of Waterbury 
and in the war, but two, so far as known to the writer, left upon 
record their individual achievements. The two men were Judah 
Frisbie and Josiah Atkins. 

The diary of Judah Frisbie may be found in Orcutt's " History of 
Wolcott." It gives, in detail, the march of Captain Phineas Porter's 
Waterbury company to New York in 1775. The company met on 
the 31st of May, "and had a sermon by the Rev. Mr. Leavenworth." 
It marched for New York June ist, at noon, and went that day 
thirteen miles " to the stores in Derby." Derby (we learn by this 
statement) had in 1775 military stores garnered at a point five miles 
" above Derby town," or, the " Derby stores "must have dated back 
to the French and Indian war, from which point, the second day's 
march was to vStratford. After a stay of three weeks at Fairfield, 
the march was resumed. Porter's company joined its regiment 
(General Wooster's) below Greenwich, and Col. Waterbury's regi- 
ment also being there, the two set out for New York. Below Rye, 
the regiments met General Washington, " who passed in a genteel 
manner and there followed him a band of music." Washington, 
at this time, must have been on his way to take command of the 
army at Boston, for this meeting was June 27th, and he arrived at 
the camp in Massachusetts, July 2, 1775. The Waterbury company 
"got into barns in the Bowery, it being very stormy," June 28th. 
The next day the regiment encamped "a little back of New York," 
where it remained three weeks. It was then ordered to Harlem. 
August 8th, as many men as were able went to Long Island " in 
pursuit of the regulars that were robbing the inhabitants of their 
cattle, sheep, etc. They were at Plumb Island, vShelter Island and 
at East Hampton, for three weeks." vSeptember 8th, the regiment 
received orders for a march to Canada. Six vessels carried the 
troops up the river. While embarking, a young man named Isaac 
Peck, a sergeant of Captain Porter's company, was drow^ned. The 
regiment landed at Albany October ist, and went into barracks, 



WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 



471 



but throuo-h fear of small pox, removed to Greenbush; October 
loth, marched through Albany, crossed the Mohawk river to the 
Half Moon, thence through Saratoga to Fort Edward and Lake 
George, which lake was crossed to Ticonderoga. Late in October 
the regiment went up Lake Champlain to Crown Point, marched 
six miles on the east side of the lake and lodged in the woods one 
night, the next night on an island forty miles above, the next night 
in the woods thirty-five miles further north, traveling northwards 
still; near St. Johns (the objective point of the expedition), a gun 
from that fort wounded one man. Miry woods next bewildered 
the regiment, which had " heavy pieces " to get through, but at 
night, by the help of " the French," the river " Sorell " was crossed, 
and an encampment arrived at. The next night, the regiment 
began a battery within about sixty rods of the fort, working at it 
two days and three nights, during which time a " considerable 
number of bombs, cannon balls and grape shot" were fired at the 
builders, but not a man was killed and only a few men were slightly 
wounded. After one day's firing from two batteries, during which 
two men of the regiment were killed and one wounded, the fort 
capitulated, and three da3^s later the regulars marched out with 
their arms, the artillerymen going out first with a field piece, and 
the train following them. " They paraded and laid down their arms, 
oar people taking possession of them." The sixth day of Novem- 
ber the regiment marched for Montreal. Judah Frisbie remained 
at the " Half- Way House, to take care of a sick man," until his 
company returned on the i8th of November, when the journey to 
the southward began. They rowed on the lake and slept in the 
woods four days and nights, when the ice forced them " to leave the 
lake and take their baggage on their backs," in which plight they 
arrived at Ticonderoga. After marching every day for fourteen 
days, the longest march in any one day being twenty-two miles, 
Norfolk, Conn., was reached on the 9th of December, 1775. Captain 
Porter's company is, by the above diary, made to give an account of 
every day of its more than six months' absence from Waterbury, 
except for the twelve days in which the company marched to 
Montreal and returned to the " Half- Way House " where Frisbie 
again joined the regiment. 

The diary of Josiah Atkins should be left to make its own 
impression, without word of comment. Any town, any people, 
any nation might hold with emotions of profoimd consideration 
and loft}'- regard the man who wrote it. An army composed of 
men like this one might conc[uer the world and leave no foe in its 
pathway. 



BISTORT OF WATERBURY. 

47- 

The period covered by the diary extends from the 5th day of 
April to Oct. 15th, 1781, just four days before the surrender by Lord 
Cornwallis. Josiah Atkins received from Col. Gimat, at the Camp 
before Yorktown, on Oct. 9th, permission to pass to the Highlands 
in the State of New York. His last words were written six days 
later. The following are extracts from the diary now in the keep- 
ing of the " New Haven Colony Historical wSociety." 

A Journal of Josiali Atkins, Waterbiirj-, Farmingbury Society in Ye State of 
Connecticut, N. England. Written by himself, A. D., 1781. 

January, 17S1, I enlisted in the Continental service, engaging for three years. 
On the 5th day of April following, marched to join the army at the Highlands . . . 
arrived at the camp the 8th of sd. month where I was joined with Col. Sherman's reg- 
iment, in Capt. Benton's * company. Our business at present is learning the military 
art. Provisions— good beef, and bread. April 20th. Tainted meat, which continued 
to the 28th. In the meantime our allowance is shortened, at first to half, then to a 
quarter, and sometimes we dratv nothing through the whole day. May 5th, Con- 
tinental Fast. // was observed, and I heard a sermon preached by Mr. Baldwin, 
our chaplain, from 2 Chron. 20th, latter clause of the 15th and 17th verses. It 
appeared the most excellent sermon I ever heard on that subject. Plenty of pro- 
vision comes again from Waterbury, but does not continue long; for five days, little 
bread and no meat. 

May the 15th I set out, which was very unexpected, to join the Infantry down 
at the southward. 

He was one " of a guard to take on cloathing, money and arms 
to the infantry." He was ten days on the march to Philadelphia, 
where he tarried several days and witnessed three men executed on 
Philadelphia common for robbery, and the pardon of three more. 

They appeared to be somewhat penitent before their execution, biit said noth- 
ing to the spectators. They all plead guilt3% and some signed their own death 
warrant. O, my God! teach me that I am a dying man, exposed continually to the 
devouring dart of the King of terrors! and, if it be consistent with thy holy will, 
keep me from every evil, particularly from sudden death; but above all things 
grant that I may continually have such trust and confidence in Thee, as not to be 
surprised by death, let it be sudden or not, sooner or later; but, whenever it shall 
come, may I be landed safely in the mansions of eternal rest and peace. May 27th 
we left Philadelphia and sailed for the head of Elk. 

He notes every point of interest on the jotirney, describing 
towns, forts and battlefields. 

Rye is now in the bloom in this country. The small pox prevails much in this 
town [Newcastle, where he landed to proceed by land]. Two small children were 
inoculated at one and the same time, died at the same time and were buried 
together at the time we landed, about ten rods from the place we lay. But thanks 
be to God, I have not taken it yet, and I praj' Him to keep me from it till a conven- 
ient opportunity to have it to advantage. However, may I have an humble 
confidence in Him at all times, and in all things. 

* Selah Benton of Stratford. 



WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 473 

Passing- on from New Castle to Christan, the head of Elk, 
Charlestown in Maryland, the Susquehannah river (which " it took 
all night to cross with the men and wagons"); he notes the strange 
trees and plants, describing and contrasting them with the trees 
and plants of Connecticut. Reaching Baltimore on Sunday, June 
3d, after describing the town, he wrote: 

This is the first time I have had the satisfaction of seeing people regard the 
Sabbath since I began my march. How aifecting the consideration that I am 
obliged to pass by, while others are worshipping in the courts of my God. This 
brings fresh to my mind my friends at home, who are now worshipping God in his 
appointed way. And behold I am here ! How lamentable my circumstances. 
Once I lived in peace at home, rejoicing in the divine favour and smiles, but now I 
am in the field of war, surrounded with circumstances of affliction and heartfelt 
disappointment. Once I enjoyed the pleasant company of many friends, but now I 
am among strangers in a strange land.* Once I could go with my friends to the 
house of the Lord, but now I spend every Sabbath hastening to the field of blood 
and slaughter. Once I could take delight in reading and hearing the word of the 
Lord preached, but now I can hear little or nothing besides the profaning of God's 
holy name and Sabbath. When shall I again be suffered to stand in the court of 
my Lord and my God ? How vastly different is this part of the world from the 
ideas I used to have of it. Instead of a plain, cleared country (as I used to think 
it), I find it covered with vast; lonely woods. Sometimes 'tis ten, fifteen or twenty 
miles between houses, and they say we have a place to pass that is thirty. This day 
(June 6th) we pass General Washington's plantation, which is of large extent. 
Some men in these parts, they tell me, own 30,000 acres of land for their patrimony, 
and many have two or three hundred negroes to work on it as slaves. Alas ! That 
persons who pretend to stand for the rights of mankind, for the liberties of society, 
can delight in oppression and that even of the worst kind. Many of the slaves are 
without clothing, almost without provisions, having very little for the support of 
nature. What, pray, is this but the strikingly inconsistent character pointed out 
by the apostle: While they protnise them liberty, they themselves are the ser- 
vants of corruption. But when I speak of oppression it readily brings to my mind 
my own troubles and afflictions. Am not I oppressed, as being obliged to leave my 
own state of peace and happiness, friends and relations, wife and child, shop and 
tools and customers, against my mind and expectations, and come these hundreds 
of miles in the capacity of a soldier carrying the cruel and unwelcome instruments of 
war. Alas ! My heart is full ! But I forbid my pen. Oh ! That I were as great 
as my grief, or less than my name ! Oh ! might I forget what I have been, or not 
remember what I must now become ! We pass his Excellency's house, and 'tis said 
we march ten miles on his land. We also went into a beautiful church and saw 
his pew. We came to Colchester and passed the ferry where the river will let up a 
large ship. The country here (and in Pennsylvania) abounded with cotton, gro^\j^g 
on a small bush, planted every year in May, and ploughed and hoed like corn. The 
7th we pressed a negro wagoner, belonging to a widow who had 900 slaves. And, 
what is remarkable, she, according to this negro, keeps them all victualed and 
clothed. This I think worthy to be noted. The Sth we continued our march in a 
great wilderness and dined on the ground. AVe expect soon to join the Marquis, 



* A note in the journal adds : The inhabitants chiefly unfriendly. 



^-^ HISrORY OF WATERS URY. 

who is pursuing the enemy. The gth we lodged on the ground the Marquis 
marched from yesterday, and which Gen. Wayne left to-day noon. We are all in 
pursuit after the British enemy. 

The loth we came up with the baggage belonging to the ^larquis. This is a 
long and tedious road, thro' a wilderness where no water is to allay our parching 
thirst. But there is a greater drought with respect to hearing the word of the Lord. 
Is not this the Holy Sabbath? But where am I, and what am I about? O Lord, 
forgive my sins, for though I am here, yet my heart is at home with thy worshipping 
people. We still direct our course through this lonesome desert. We marched not 
far from fifty miles without finding above one or two houses and as little water, 
finding none unless in swamps or mud holes. At night we passed Gen. Wayne and 
joined the infantry at 8 o'clock on the morning of the nth, after a long and tedious 
march of more than six hundred miles, which cost us near a month's time, together 
with much fatigue and great hardships. Gen. Wayne joined soon after, and the 
militia are coming on. We march at 2 o'clock and expect to come up with the 
enemy in a day or two. Our infantry this day (except those who came with me) 
had dealt out to them, one Holland shirt, one lining one, one frock and two pair of 
overalls. At revelle-beating we marched off the ground and passed along a solitary 
desert where we were in great strait for drink (houses being as seldom as colleges 
in Connecticut, and wells as scarce as virtuous pooLs).* This day we had one 
month's pay in hard money. . . . At the rising of the sun on the 14th we marched 
twelve or fifteen miles before we halted, and, thoiigh the last night was so severely 
cold that we could not lie warm with all the clothes we had, yet, after the sun rose 
the heat increased to that degree, together with the dust and want of water, as to 
render the air almost suifocating . . . for we found not a drop of water all the 
way. We came near famishing all. Some fainted, while others dropped with 
weary legs by the way, and this was only a forenoon's march. What may we not 

expect in the afternoon and what must be our fate through the stimmer 

The 15th we lay, 'tis said within four miles of the enemj', who retreated all the 
night and got some start of us. The next day we began our route at break of day 
and continued it till the middle of the afternoon, and then encamped in the woods 
about fifty miles from Richmond. 

This morning we had our General's [Wayne] applause for our fortitude to bear 
hardships with patience — meat being out and our bread but poor. It is made 
chiefly of coarse Indian meal, which we wet and bake on barks, on stones. How- 
ever, we not being used to such bread, nor such a country, the day being intensely 
hot, and the night as cold (we having no tents to cover us), our march long, water 
unwholesome and rum not very plenty, and the great and unexpected distance 
from home— all these together make my trials almost insupportable. Among the 
many insects that trouble us, wood-ticks are not the least, for they are exceeding 
many and exceeding troublesome. There is also a most venomous spider, and a 
small creature that afflicts us far worse than wood-ticks. Yea, though they are the 
smallest Hving things I ever saw (I think they would hardly be discerned were it 
rva^ for their colour, which is scarlet red), they go through one's clothes, creep into 
the pores of the skin, where they cause it to swell to the degree of a bee sting and 
are exceeding itching and smarting, and sometimes dangerous. They have a shell 
like a tortoise. The inhabitants call them Gigars, and thev comparatively are as 
thick as the dust of the earth. 

The enemy are now in Richmond. The 17th, marched fifteen or twenty miles. 
O Lord God our fatigue and troubles are so great that one can scarcely attend 

♦ See Agur Mallory. 



WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 475 

even so much as to think on thy Holy Day! Yea, we can scarcely attend to our 
necessary food. But may we sooner forget what to eat than the Sabbath of the 

Lord There was a duel fought this day between a militia oihcer and 

Lieut. Wheaton of the Connecticut line, in which encounter the latter was killed, 
or at least mortally wounded. He was our brigade quarter-master, or wagon- 
master general. The i8th we lay still; sent out scouts, and took some pris- 
oners belonging to Tarlton's light-horse. When we went after Tarlton's light- 
horse, we went without our pieces being loaded and with our flints taken out, that 
no one might fire a gun. General Wayne, whom they call "Mad Anthonj- " and 
" Sword-in-hand," intended to have put them all to the bayonet. About dusk, the 
Marquis stole a march on the enemy, but without success. [The next night was 
spent in marching, by which the enemy's camp was reached at sunrise, but the 
troops were fled, " perhaps well for them." Days of marching (the march beginning 
at I o'clock in the morning), and retreating; to and past Richinond — where were 
large stores of various kinds, much private property, and many thousand hogsheads 
of tobacco — followed; "the troops seldom catching more than two hours sleep 
in twenty-four," not taking time for food, and exposed daily to small pox. He 
writes: on June 23:] I must shut my book for the present. The drum beats for 
parading. The news, the enemy are upon us! On this, we formed a solid column 
in order to receive their horse, which were approaching with their infantry, whom 
they preceded. They came in sight, but durst not give us battle. They retreated 
precipitately, by which we soon understood they were a rear guard, sent back to 
cause us to make a halt, that our foes might slip away with their main body and 
baggage. Here I must take notice of some villany. Within these days past I have 
marched by iS or 20 negroes that lay dead by the wayside, putrifying with the 
small pox. How such a thing came about, appears to be thus: The negroes here 
being much disaffected (arising from their harsh treatment), flocked in great num- 
bers to Cornwallis. This artful general takes a number of them (several hundreds) 
inoculates them, and just as they are growing sick, he sends them out into the 
country where our people had to pass and repass. These poor creatures, having 
no care taken of them, many crawled into the bushes about and died. This is a 
piece of Cornwallisean cruelty. He is not backward to own that he has inoculated 
4 or 500 in order to spread the small pox through the country, and sent them out for 
that purpose, which is another piece of his conduct that wants a name. But there 
is a King far above the British King, and a Lord superior to their lords. . . . 
[Executions for desertion, marching, alarms and an account of the harvests follow, 
and then an enumeration of the opposing forces. The British army, according to 
accounts, was about 5,000. The American army he estimates, by supposition, to 
be 2,500 regulars, 300 volunteer light horse, 300 rifles on horseback, 300 foot, 
besides 3 or 4,000 militia. The 20th, a skirmish ensued; the killed on the enemy's 
side amounted it was said, to 200. They were obliged to retreat to the main body. 
. . . . On the 6th of July thej- came unexpectedly upon a large body of the 
enemy all paraded in a line of battle. The inhabitants had declared that there 
was no enemy within six miles.] He writes: Our officers and soldiers, like brave 
heroes, began the attack* with, at first, but a handful of men. The contest began 
at five and lasted until dark. The riflemen, some of them, 'tis said, stayed and 
scirmished with the enemj- in the woods all night, so that they have not found time 
nor opportunity to pick up their dead. Our party consisted only of the brigade of 
infantry and one brigade of Pennsylvanians (and these not more than half of them 

* The battle of Green Spring. 



^ BISTORT OF WA TEE BURY. 

engaged) and a few riflemen. The enemy were more than six times our number. 
Our loss of men cannot yet be ascertained. The enemy gained the ground, but 
have no cause to glory— their dead from all appearances being many. We retired 
five miles that night to rest and get some refreshments of which we stood in much 
need. [The action began at the moment the infantry had halted to take food 
after a long march] having had neither victuals, rum, nor water, and a// we then 
had was one gill of vinegar to 4 men. How great was thy mercy, O Lord, in our 
dehverance! The like was hardly ever heard of ! Six hundred men have attacked 
and stood the fire, sword, and bayonet of the force of an army of 5,000, yea, of the 
whole army under Lord Cornwallis. Where we were often broke, often formed; 
several times almost surrounded; and yet all (as I may say in comparison of what 
might have been expected) came off again in heart! Wonderful Providence! Our 
general, the Marquis had two horses shot under him, yet he is not daunted. He is 
collecting his army and designs to have another action immediately if the enemy 
will. O Lord, impress my heart with a grateful sence of thy goodness in preserving 
me, my life and health. While so many of my acquaintances, have since the last 
Sabbath, been numbered with the vast congregation of the dead. O Lord, my 
God, I acknowledge, that though thousands should fall at my side, and ten 
thousand at my right hand, yet thou canst protect me .... in the night of 
the arrows of death. Thou Lord directest every ball, that none can wound unless 
by thy permission. 

I cannot forget this memorable action ! So few as a 1000 men should attack the 
whole British force and lose no more, even when we were several times cut off and 
scattered to and fro. The fatigues of the day I cant describe, and being weary 
before we began ! Our general gave us great applause. He assured us that he 
hmiself was eye-witness to our two regiments attacking the whole army with spirit. 
Immediately after this action, Cornwallis crossed the river and embarked on board 
his shipping with the greatest precipitation, leaving a large number of beeves half- 
dressed. 

[The journal next relates— after marches and a day's rest— a description of a 
complete gig-mill, "having two wheels and two pair of stones," accompanied by a 
" Draft of the above described gig-mill wheel." This is followed by an account of 
the bite of a venomous spider on the shoulder of a man, for whom the doctor could 
do nothing, "the victim continuallj'- rolling over and screaming out horribly." 
Atkins relieved him by "opening a vein" and "feeding him freely with salt and 
water, so that he felt some immediate ease and in 2 or three hours was comfortable." 
A few days later he wrote :] 

I am at present among the invalids and unfit for duty, but Providence has so 
ordered it as to make me instrumental of some good to my country, at least to my 
fellow soldiers; which is, by letting blood and drawing teeth. This last I practice 
very much, there being not another tooth-drawer in the whole army, and the other 
considerably — because few doctors have tools to let blood. . . 

July 15th. Marched 15 miles to James river, the other side of which the enemy 
are landing down below us. Our men begin to sicken already: what then, alas ! 
shall we see when dogdays come on? Next month is the season for the fever and 
ague. The 17th we lay still and cleaned our arms and clothes. The iSth three men 
were drowned in James river, swimming. . . . 21st. At ten o'clock we received 
intelligence of four gun boats coming up the river — supposed to be in order to catch 
our general— the Marquis, who quartered near the river. On this, about 500 of us 
pressed forward with two field pieces to scare them back again. We marched 8 
miles and came upon them. Our engineer directed his shot so well as to strike 



WATERBURT IN THE REVOLUTION. 



477 



through the hull and cut away the foremast of one of the boats. The second shot 
took the rudder, and what our other 28 shot must have done, it appears must have 
been considerable. They immediately towed down the river. We followed them 4 
miles but could get no more shot at them. We retired and came to camp that even- 
ing, having traveled 24 miles. 

[The 2 2d was Sunday. The recurrence of that day throughout the journal bears 
witness to Josiah Atkins's firm faith and devout spirit, and evinces a remarkable and 
genuinely cordial love for the day and its observances.] This day, at court martial, 
2 corporals were tried and broke; 5 men sentenced to receive 100 lashes apiece, and 
one ■]ofor being absent at roll-call. Three received their punishment. The others 
are suspended till to-morrow — there not being time : There have been six others 
punished within 5 days past. [Is it surprising that it was difficult to persuade men 
to enlist ?] 

23d. Last night was so excessively cold, that I think I scarcely ever suffered so 
much with it in one night in my life. This day, I went to the hospital to recover my 
health. 

25th. A man was executed this day in our regiment for breaking up a hotise, 
and robbing it. 

26th. Thunder and rain for these many days. Some are very sick in the hos- 
pital. The number increases both here and in camp. . . . 

29th. This is the first day of the week: But alas ! where is the Sabbath ? Is 
there any in Virginia? Is there any in the 13 States of America? True, in New 
England the}^ pretend to keep it. But do even they keep it as they ought ? Do they 
call it a delight ? The holy of the Lord, honorable ? Truly, is it not to he feared, 
that for the most part this is only a bare pretence ? The fear of punishment is the 
real motive. 

31st. One of our regiments has crossed the river. I am yet in the flying hos- 
pital, which is very disagreeable. We marched at 4 o'clock A. il. and encamped 2 
miles out of Richmond. 

Aug. 3d. We marched through Richmond (where the small pox is very plenty) 
and encamped 6 miles above. Here we buried one of our number, who died this 
day on the road, in the hospital waggon. We buried him in a wood. He was aged 
23 years. His name, Rufus Robins, and unmarried; his parents live in Lyme in 
Connecticut. He died of camp distemper. 

The 5th. This morning sun has blest the earth. 

It hath unsealed my eyes : 
This is the day of joy and mirth 
That saw our Saviour rise. 

[After a second stanza, the day's march of 8 miles began. At evening, he added 
three more stanzas.] Gen. Wayne is on his march to join the marquis; the enemy, 
'tis said, are blocked up in the Bay and cant get out, though they have made sev- 
eral attempts. 

The 6th. It is reported that the enemy is landing down against York. 

The 7th. We lay still in a garden, where I saw some rarities — viz.: bean trees, 
fig trees and the like. 

The 8th. Our troops marched down towards York; the sick towards Hanover 
and I among the sick. 

The loth. We have a convenient house for a hospital .... We have a supply 
of some fruit, as green corn, apples, pears, peaches and watermelons, by the 
negroes; but, at a dear rate. Apples, pears, and peaches cost one dollar apiece 
(Continental currency), and watermelons 30 dollars 



^ g HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 

The iSth. General Wayne lyeth at Newcastle, our troops at and the 

enemy at York 

2"-,A. This day I have been sent for two ways. A man sent and desired to hire 
nie, in order to instruct him how to make files, gimblets, knives and forks, etc. and 
the doctor sent for me to come and live with him, in order to assist him in his 
hurry of business, dealing out medicines, dressing wounds, etc. [Daily arrivals 
from the army were taking place at the hospital " three waggon loads" having 
arrived from the brigade the day before,] I am at a loss which will be the most 
profitable invitation to me. It must be the former, I being best acquainted with 
that work, but the doctor is so importunate, that I promised him to come to mor- 
row, if I should be no worse. 

24th. I came to the doctor's assistance and as far as I knew, gave him satisfac- 
tion. I have such thirst for medical knowledge, that were I capable of the business 
in which I am now engaged, I should be content without prospect of wages. 

27th The number of our sick increases. 

28th. We have some of whose life we despair. 

29th. We ai-e out of hospital stores suitable for the sick, in particular, medicines. 

30th. We expect, and are continually waiting for the medicines to come. 

31st. [He was called up to see Henry Evans, thought to be dying. The next 
day, Pendleton of Penn. died. " They buried him in a coffin, which was purchased 
with one of his shirts." His descriptions of thunder storms, in one of which he and 
others received a shock, are vivid. Occasionally, a man died " out of the hospital " 
whose name is not given and the "sick" were constanth* increasing, which ren- 
dered his business truly fatiguing. We cannot omit the following:] In the morn- 
ing I rise at daylight and go about a quarter of a mile to wash; then comb my hair; 
and then I recommend myself to God. After this I have nothing to do but to sit 
down to dealing out and putting up medicines for all the sick; where I continue till 
8 o'clock, which is breakfast time: Which done, I visit the hospitals with the doc- 
tor, which takes us till 10 o'clock. From that time till dinner, I spend among the 
medicines: Dinner over, I have to carry the medicines to all the men in each hos- 
pital — one, is half a mile distant, with 8 rooms in it. From this I come directly 
back and visit 7 or 8 houses more, some 5, some 7 rooms, where I deal to every man 
liis particular portion. vSome will have 8, some 6, and generally they have 4 in a day 
— which, multiplied by 300 (there being so many, or more sick) will amount to a great 
many [portions]. Besides, I have to give particular directions to every one (and 
sometimes 2 or 3 times over, by reason of their stupidit)^) how and when to take 
them, lest they should do wrong, and the medicine lose its effect. All this, 
together with the feelings nature has given me for the sick and wounded, give me 
very great care, trouble, fatigue and anxiety of mind; with which, I return home, 
the day being spent, take a little supper, enter my chamber, close the door, and 
after recommending myself and them to God. and my friends and all to his care 
(my thoughts being in a great measure composed) I take my rest. 
" Then with my tho'ts composed to peace 

I give mine eyes to sleep; 
Thy hand in safety keeps ni}^ days. 
And will my slumbers keep." 

— D. W. 

Sept. 4th. Last Sabbath the news came that the French had landed a number 
of troops, and this day we hear our men are gone to join them. I hope we shall 
not lose all this fatigueing summer yet. But gracious God, spare the blood ! No 
more wounds, nor sudden deaths, if it consist with thv blessed will ! But I can 



WATERBURY IN THE REVOLUTION. 479 

sing of mercies as well as judgement: Yea, the Lord is m}^ song. Providence 
has called me from home, .... into this distant land, where is no man I 
ever knew or saw before (save one), yet he hath given me friends. I am eyed with 
friendly notice, while other recruits as good (perhaps much better), are treated as 
strangers. How comes this about? From whom comes preferment? And whence 
the favors I now enjoy? .... Who would have thought that I should be 
chosen to that business I am unacquainted with .... while others are 
neglected, who by long practice and experience have proved themselves skillful 

in it My business is fatigueing but far easier for me than the 

disaffected camp, and the loathsome instruments of war. I have as good provisions 
as I could wish, cooked ready to my desire. I have as beautiful chamber as any in 
Virginia to myself, and can retire when I please from the notice of any one but 
God. Add to this a good state of health and I am as happy as it is possible for 
Virginia to make me. Yea, since my coming here, I have almost forgot my native 
home. O Lord, fill my heart with a sense of thy goodness .... and when I 
enter my room, whether joyful or pensive, may this strike a divine calm on my 
soul — that I have no continuing city here .... and may this turn my 
thoughts on seeking another and better, even an heavenly one, whose builder and 
maker is God. 

The 5th (September) we have much news stirring and if all be true, we shall 
soon have a large army in this quarter. His Excellency, 'tis said, is on his way to 
join us. [Here follow matters of special hospital interest, deaths, the illness of 
the " doctor," whereby all the care of the patients fell upon Atkins ; which together 
with the sudden changes from heat to cold, with wet, foggy weather, affected his 
own health. Terrible storms with thunder and lightning arose,] filling the minds 
of all with almost unsupportable horror, .... the airy heavens 
rending o'er our heads with tremendous, awful claps of thunder, that seemed to 
echo from pole to pole ! and the earth under our feet appeared all glowing with 
electrical flames. 

The 13th. Last Saturday the 2d division of French troojss joined our army with 
5,000 men, and his Excellency, Gen. Washington, is to join in a few days, and the 
report is that 10,000 militia are to be in readiness to take the field immediately.* 

[The 17th Josiah Atkins was taken ill with a violent pain in his head. The 19th 
he wrote:] My headache increases and medicine cannot remove it till God put to 
his hand. It continued till the 27th, all which time I got little nourishment and no 
sleep, but what I obtained by the help of anodyne pills 

October the ist. I continue better, though full of pain. 

The 2d. This day I made application for a pass to return to the northward. 
But I find that I cannot obtain it without going 120 miles right from home, and 
then 'tis uncertain whether I obtain one or not — which is enough to discourage one, 
being sick and lame. But I leave the affair with God my disposer. 

The 3d. To-day I concluded to journey to the regiment [for his pass]. 

The 4th. This day I obtained my recommend from the doctor, about 10 o'clock. 

Hanover, 4th October, 1781. 
Josiah Atkins, of Capt. Douglas's company in Col. Gimat's regiment laboring 
under a confirmed rheumatism, which will render him unfit for any further duty 
in the field this campaign, is hereby recommended for leave to retire into the 
country for the recovery of his health. John Simpson, Surgeon. 



' On the 15th Josiah Atkins's son, Josiah, was born in Waterbury. He died at the age of iS years. 



y^j HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

About 12 I set off, feeble and faint hearted ; but I hope God will go with me. 
Travelled lo miles. 

The 5th. Was overtaken by a waggoner from Southington (one Thorp), and his 
waggon being chiefly empty, he was pleased to let me ride. We came as far as N. 
Kent court house where we put up. This is about 20 miles from N. Castle. 

The 6th. This is the Lord's day. It is something stormy, but we expect to 
reach Williamsburg, which is 15 or 16 miles. I concluded to tarry here over the 
Sabbath, (though we came about noon) in hopes that there was some meeting house 
in this place. But I was disappointed: and standing about in the cold (there being 
no fire for soldiers), I took the fever and ague to my great sorrow. 

The Sth. I set out on foot for the camp. I reached it about the middle of the 
afternoon. Had a fit of the ague. 

The 9th. Completed my business* by 10 o'clock, and set off for Williamsbtirg, 
where I arrived before night— 12 miles. Lodged in the flying Hospital. 

The loth. I left Williamsburg and continued my march till the 12th at night, 
when I reached the hospital very weak and low— having the ague and fever every 
da}'. 

The 13th. I thank thee, O Lord for the prospect, and wilt thou hasten the time 
when I shall again stand in the assembly of thy people. Though thy Sabbaths are 
forgotten almost everywhere, yet I have reason to hope that 'tis not entirely neg- 
lected in my native State. 

Oct. the 15th. I recruit but very slow; my ague and fever is very severe on me 
at present. 

The diary of Josiah Atkins contains on its opening page the fol- 
lowing pathetic entreaty. It is without date, but was probably 
written in July, or August, 1781. 

My Dear Friends and Fellow Soldiers: — As we are engaged in a bloody 
war, the fate of which is uncertain; as we are drawing near the enemy and can 
expect nothing but fighting; as in any action some may fall; and as my life is as 
uncertain as any others; so should it be my fate to drop and yours to survive, you 
may chance to light on this book and its contents, with the other things I may hap- 
pen to have about me, which 'tis probable will be a ivatcJi, a pair of silver shoe 
buckles, knee buckles, stock buckle, brooch, stone sleeve-buttons, and perhaps 
some money. These, I will freely give you. Yea, I bid you welcome to them on 
your [en] gaging to grant me this request. To use best your utmost endeavor to 
send this book with its contents to my dear w4fe, whom [I] have left at home to 
mourn my misfortune. Should this fall into the hands of our [enemies] I have no 
expectation of its ever reaching [her]. But should any of you, my friends and fel- 
low soldiers, take this, I expect, I request, Yea I [have] reason to exact it at your 
hands. You may think this of small importance: However, You must suppose 
that it will be satisfactory to her (on whose account it was written) to hear my fate, 
XoVi may think the matter is difflcult; but I assure you 'tis not. If you convey it to 

* Josiah Atkins being rendered unfit (by sickness) for service in the light infantry — Has permission to 
pass from this to the Highlands in the State of New York to rejoin the regiment to which he belongs. 

J. GIMAT, Lt. Col. Commandant. 
Camp before York, Sth Oct., 1781. 

The commissaries of the respective Posts are requested to furnish the above Soldier with provision as 
it shall become due. J. GIMAT, Lf. Col, Comtnandant. 

Camp before York, Sth Oct., 1781. 

This was the day the American forces began the firing on Yorktown. 



WATERBURT IN TEE REVOLUTION. 481 

any of the infantry belonging to Waterbury in Connecticut (my wife and friends 
living in that town), or to any who belong to Woodbury or Watertown or any of the 
towns adjacent, it will hardly fail to reach my house, Josiah Atkins in Waterbury, 
or in the Society of Farmingbury. Give them some ot your bounty to induce them 
to be faithful in discharging their trust in delivering this to my wife. This is a 
thing I so anxiously desire, that if you do not use your utmost endeavor for this 
purpose, I cannot forgive you, neither will God (unless by bitter repentance — but 
the things you have taken will rise in Judgment against you). Thus I entreat you 
by these powerful inducements, and I could use many more — but relying on your 
goodness, generosity and benevolence, I shall add no more; assuring you, I ever 
was while in life, the friend and well-wisher of all the soldiers. 

JOSIAH ATKINS. 

P. S. Should this fall into the hands of any other person than a soldier, I do 
request and expect the same kind treatment at their hands, and though I nor mine 
should not be able to reward you, yet God will. 

The journal also contains a number of letters, addressed to 
his wife, in one of which he makes the following reference to his 
journal: "I cannot say a perfect one, as some thing-s were left 
out through mistake, and many more on purpose, because I thought 
they would afflict you more than comfort — they being afflicting to 
me." He also makes allusion to his "full disappointment of the 
business that induced him to enlist in the army (which alone could 
give him content in the service);" refers to his little daughter as 
"my little innocent, my heart's delight," and again, as " Sally, my 
babe, my darling ! who is the delight of my eyes." There is one 
very remarkable letter, in which he pictures the physical and men- 
tal effects of his trials upon himself, until he was obliged to banish 
thoughts of his best friends from his mind, as though they had been 
his most dangerous foes. The letter ends with the words, "I 
thought I could not be contented to take my last little portion of 
land (though but my length and breadth), and leave my lifeless 
lump on this barren soil ! However, when I reflected that this bar- 
ren soil of Virginia must be enriched with the rich manure of Con- 
necticut; that my little lump was no dearer to me than another 
man's to him; that our cause is just and must be supported, and 
that God will raise the dead here as well as in Connecticut — these 
thoughts put me to silence, and I became (I hope) in some measure 
resigned to God's will." 

I have not been able to learn in what manner or by whose hand 
the diary of Josiah Atkins was returned to his wife. It seems 
probable that he died at the hospital at Hanover, to which he had 
returned on October 12th, after his journey of 120 miles to procure 
his passport, in order to join his former regiment in the Highlands 
of New York. In a letter addressed to his wife, and included in 
31 



g2 BISTORT OF WATERBURT. 

the diary, he counsels and urges her, in the event of his death, to 
marrv ao-ain; but to make provision, in that case, for his daughter 

Sally^ 

Josiah Atkins married Sarah, the daughter of Deacon Josiah 
Roo-ers, Jan. 31, 1779. His daughter Sally was born Nov. 20, 1780, 
and became the wife of Asahel Lewis. His son Josiah, born Oct. 
15 1781, died in 1799. The estate of Josiah Atkins was in the Pro- 
bate court, at Waterbury, in February, 1782. Mrs. Atkins married 
in 1790, Amos Culver. A granddaughter of Mrs. Sarah Culver 
remembers how tenderly her grandmother (who died in 1845) cher- 
ished the little book, which always held its own place among her 
treasures. It is said of Mrs. Culver that the boys of the neighbor- 
hood in which she lived would leave their games at any time to 
hear her talk, and that she had great influence over them. 

That this valuable and unique addition to the history and the 
literature of the war should be presented to the public only after 
the lapse of more than a century, is truly surprising. 

Waterbury, as it was found at the close of the long, the desper- 
ate, the demoralizing struggle for freedom — when the soldiers 
returned from making war, to make for a time but indifferent citi- 
zens — was, in many of its aspects, a new Waterbury. Into it came 
a new impetus, wrought from contact with the outside world. 
Men could not mingle for so long a time with the army from 
France and participate in the scenes that marked the closing year 
of the war, and not with their return, bring a new spirit into the 
town. 

The festival, held on the plain at West Point, in honor of the 
birth of the Dauphin of France, in May of 1782, was not-without its 
far-reaching influence. The sight of a thousand men working for 
ten days to erect a "curious edifice, six hundred feet long," and 
supported by a grand colonade of one hundred and eighteen pillars, 
made of the trunks of trees; the adorning of it with "American 
and French military colors," with emblem, device, and motto ; the 
parading of the whole allied army " on the contiguous hills on both 
sides of the river, forming a circle of several miles in open view of 
the public edifice "; the feasting and the demonstrations of glad- 
ness that followed, were not in vain. 

On April 19th, 1783, eight years from the 19th of April, 1775, 
the commander-in-chief ordered the cessation of hostilities between 
the United States of America and the king of Great Britain. In 
May of 1783 the Society of the Cincinnati was formed. Its mem- 
bers were all officers in the Continental army. Major David Smith, 
Captain Nehemiah Rice (Royce), Dr. Ebenezer Beardsley, Major 



WATEBBURY IN THE REVOLUTION. 483 

Ezekiel Scott and Isaac Bronson, (who was surgeon's mate) were 
the Waterbury members of the Connecticut vSociety; Surgeon 
Nathan Leavenworth, of the Massachusetts Society. The treaty of 
peace was signed September 23d. On November 2d, Washington 
issued his "farewell orders to the armies of the United States," 
concluding with the words : " And being now to conclude these his 
last public orders, to take his ultimate leave in a short time of the 
military character, and to bid adieu to the armies he has so long 
had the honor to command, he can only again offer in their behalf 
his recommendations to their grateful country, and his prayers to 
the God of armies. May ample justice be done them here, and 
may the choicest of Heaven's favors, both here and hereafter, 
attend those who, under the divine auspices, have secured innum- 
erable blessings for others ! With these wishes, and this benedic- 
tion, the commander-in-chief is about to retire from service. The 
curtain of separation will soon be drawn, and the military scene to 
him will be closed forever." On the 25th of November the British 
army evacuated New York, and the American troops, under Gen- 
eral Knox, took possession of the city. This event was soon fol- 
lowed by the public entry of General Washington and Governor 
Clinton. The scene enacted in Francis' tavern soon followed, 
when Washington not with words, but with tears and kisses, bade 
farewell to each of the principal officers of his armies, and went 
out in silence to the barge that lay in waiting at " White Hall," to 
convey him on his way to Annapolis, whither he went to lay before 
congress the commission under which, as Commander-in-chief of 
the armies of the United States, he had led armies and colonies to 
honorable independence and victorious peace. 

Since writing the above, the following miscellaneous facts have 
been gathered. To the list of those who " joined the enemy " have 
been added the names of Samuel Doolittle, Thomas Fenn, Titus 
Finch, Jesse Hikcox, Jared Hikcox and Robert Hotchkiss. 

Daniel Finch absconded October i, 1776. He deserted the enemy 
the 13th of August, 1779, returned home, and was ordered to reside 
in Hartford. 

Seth Warner deserted in December, 1776. He "made his escape 
at the risque of his life from Newport," and threw himself upon the 
mercy of his country. He was allowed to return to Waterbury and 
be confined within the bounds thereof under the care of the select- 
men, if the town was willing to receive him; if not willing, he was 
to go to Windsor. 

Richard Miles was induced to repair to New York, where he 
joined the enemy. November 11, 1778, he escaped, returned to 



^84 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

Waterbury and took the oath of fidelity. He was restored to his 
rights on paying the cost of prosecution. 

Joseph Mun of Waterbury, a "poor African servant" of William 
Nichols, petitioned May 2, 1780, for his liberty, he having served in 
the war. He stated that he " was sold to Thomas Seymour, Esq., of 
Hartford, then to Daniel Barber, and so from one to another until 
he came into the hands of William Nichols, who, on condition of 
his faithful service for three years, encouraged him with his free- 
dom," which Nichols refused to grant at the end of three years' 
service. Mun then offered to enlist, and Nichols consented. Mun 
enlisted in Thaddeus Cook's regiment in 1776, and continued to 
serve almost continually until 1780. Before Nichols absconded he 
gave a bill of sale of Mun to Thomas Hikcox, Jr. Mun's petition 
for liberty was not granted. April 5, 1781, he was discharged (at 
the Highlands) from service. by Col. Durkee, on account of a broken 
arm and stiff knees. Hikcox, through his lawyer, John Trumbull, 
who had hitherto contested the petition for emancipation, now 
withdrew his opposition (a broken -armed, stiff -kneed slave not 
being profitable to a master). The petition was finally negatived 
in 17S5. 

In March, 1781, vStephen Matthews petitioned for pay for fifty- 
five tons of hay which he had bought at the request of the State 
Commissary and which was stored in Wallingford. He transported 
it to Waterbury, but no receiver had been appointed for it, and it 
was exposed all winter. "Sheldon's whole regiment of horse fed 
tipon it for six days and left such receipts as he pleased." 

Dr. Isaac Baldwin, physician, was employed by the State to 
attend Ebenezer Hibbert — a soldier in Col. Swift's regiment — dur- 
ing his sickness in Waterbury in October and November, 1778. He 
paid him nineteen visits, for which he charged the same number of 
pounds and shillings. His bill for medicines was appended. 
William Rowley, who had nursed and boarded Hibbert, had received 
his pay in 1780, but no bill for medical services had been paid. Dr. 
Baldwin's petition was denied. 

Col. Angel's regiment, of Rhode Island, passed through Water- 
bury in September of 1777.* 

Captain Curtis, of Waterbury, and his company "belonging to 
Col. McClellan's regiment of new-raised troops," were ordered to 
march immediately to New Haven, for the defence of that place, on 
August 28, 1778. 

* See also " Break Neck" in the Place-name Chapter, for account of the passage of the French army. 



WA TERB UR T IN THE RE VOL UTION. 485 

To the list of Waterbury's Revolutionary soldiers are added the 
following : 

Freelove Blake, Eldad Hotchkiss, Nathan Page, 

Richard Blake , Medad Hotchkiss, Nathan Piatt, 

Daniel Brown,* Reuben Matthews, Elisha Stevens, 

Jonathan Carter, (died August 2, 1779), Benjamin Terrill, 

Simeon Cole, Christopher Merriam, Jedediah Turner, 

Mark Hopkins, Job Oviat or "Uffit," Capt. Samuel Upson, 
(died at White Plains), 

Among the errors which, of necessity, have been embodied in 
the "Adjutant General's report of Connecticut Men in the Revolu- 
tion " (and which each town in the state should correct while such 
corrections may be made), perhaps the most noticeable one in our 
own town is that relating to Josiah Atkins. f There were two men 
of that name, both from Waterbury and cousins, who were in service 
at the same time in 1775. 

By an error, the name of Joseph Atkins has been placed upon 
the roll on page 354, in Captain Douglass' company — whereas, it 
should be Josiah Atkins. If we needed other evidence than the 
diary (of his service), we have only to turn to page 351 and find 
there the names of Henry Evens — of whom Josiah Atkins has told 
us: "On the night of August 31, 1781, I was called up to see Henry 
Evens, thought to be dying ; " and of Rufus Robbins, of whom, 
August 3, he wrote: "We marched through Richmond and 
encamped six miles above. Here we buried one of our number, who 
died this day on ye road in ye hospital waggon. We buried him in 
a wood. He was aged twenty-three years. His name, Rufus Rob- 
bins, and unmarried. His parents live in Lyme, Connecticut." 

It may also be mentioned that our Lake Potter (so named from 
the fact that Lake's father, Daniel Potter, was, on the day of Lake's 
birth, August 13, 1759, on Lake George, he being then in service in 
the French and Indian war) is concealed under the name of Lake 
Patten. 

Waterbury, at the close of the war, found herself territorially 
reduced by the towns of Watertown and Plymouth of a large sec- 

* In command of the fort at Milford in 1779. Benjamin Hine was associated with him. 
+ Josiah Atkins, whose diary has been given, wrote the following letter, which, having been carefully 
preserved, lies before me: 

Camp at Stillwater, Nov. ye ioth, 1777. 
Dear Sister — I would inform you that I am well at present, but having orders to march immediately 
cannot stay to write. I send you a copy of our affairs, which is good news to every soul that loves freedom. 
I must say no more. Josiah Atkins. 

P. S. I may have mist the day of ye month, but am not certain. 
Abigail Atkins, 

At Farraingbury. 
Josiah Atkins taught school in Farmington from October, 1770, to April, 1772. 



486 



HISTORY OF WATEBBUBY. 



tion of her former domain, and of perhaps fully one-half of her 
wealth and population. Nevertheless, the following summary of 
the tax-list for the year 1782 reveals to us a total valuation of more 
than ;^2o,ooo, and an enumeration of a little over 400 taxpayers — 
whereas, the estimate at the beginning of the war, when the town 
was a unit, was about 750 taxpayers. 

The following is : 

A true List of the Polls and Estate of the Town of Waterbury ratable by Law 
on the 20th Day of August, 1782, Errors Excepted. 
No. 

Polls from 21 to 70 years of age, at^iS . 



326 
76 

459 
929 
424 
386 
528 
602 
310 
2S16 

4613 

212 

II 

556 
4721 
4074 

4935 
1982 

I 
13 

9 



Polls from 16 to 21 " " " 9 

Oxen, &c., . . • " 4 

Cows, &c. . . . "3 

Steers, Heifers, &c., of 2 years, " 2 

" " " I year. 

Horse kind of i, 2 and 3 years old, . 
Swine, ..... 

Dwelling Houses, 
Acres of Plow Land, 

Upland, Mowing and Pasture, 
Boggy Meadow, mowed, 

" " not mowed, 

Meadow Land, 
Bush Pasture, 

Uninclosed Land, ist Rate, 
2d " 
" 3d .. . 

Riding Chair with open top, 
Silver and other Watches, 
Steel and Brass Wheeled Clocks, 
Wooden Wheeled Clock, 
Ounces of Silver Plate, 
Additions were made of about . 



;^5.868 

. 684 

1836 

2787 

S48 

386 

J 894 

602 

242 

1405 

1845 



I 

208 
472 
407 
246 
49 
3 

19 

27 

I 



600 



A List of Persons Assessed for Faculty, with the several sums assessed 
List of August, 1782. 



PHYSICIANS AND 


SURGEONS. 




BLACK SMITHS 


Isaac Baldwin, 




^12 


Samuel Frost, Jr., . 


Preserved Porter, 




. 12 


Ephraim Warner, 


Abel Bronson, 




— 


Ard Welton, 


TRADER OR SHOPKEEPER. 




Dan. Tuttle, . 


Irijah Terril, . 




• 30 


Jared Byington, 


TAVERN KEEPERS. 




Elijah Sperry, . 


William Leavenworth, 




30 




Samuel Judd, . 




• 25 


TANNERS AND SHOEM 


Jacob Sperry, 




15 


William Adams, 


Isaac Bronson, Jr., 




. 20 


Charles Cook, . 


Thaddeus Bronson, 




15 


Isaac Hopkins, 


Thomas Porter, Jr., . 




• 15 


William Adams, Jr. , . 



on the 



£ 5 

. 12 

12 



10 

5 



WATERS URT IN THE REVOLUTION. 



487 



GOLD SMITH 

Joseph Hopkins, . 

OWNERS OF MILLS. 

Col. Jonathan Baldwin, 
Lemuel Hoadly, 
Sebe Bronson, 
George Nichols, 
Jobamah Gunn, 



CLOTHIERS. 

£2?) William Rowley, . 
Elijah Osborn, 

JOINER. 

25 David Prichard, 

6 WHEEL MAKER. 

10 David Byington, 

^2 MALSTER. 

, 18 Uri Scott. . 



John Welton, 
Daniel Byington, 
Simeon Hopkins, 
JuDE Hoadley, 
Eli Bronson, 
Noah Baldwin, 
Stephen Ives, 
Amos Culver. 



;^5 



^408 



Listers 

of 
Waterbury. 



Dated Jan. 21st, 1783. 



CHAPTER XXXV. 

FROM 1783 TO 1825 "the critical PERIOD OF AMERICAN HISTORY" 

THE QUIET LIFE OF WATERBURY IN THOSE STIRRING TIMES ITS 

LOSSES OF TERRITORY BY THE WITHDRAWAL OF SEVERAL TOWNS 

— ITS LOCAL GOVERNMENT ITS TOWN MEETINGS AND THE DUTIES 

OF ITS SELECTMEN THE STIMULUS OF THE WAR OF l8l2 A 

SPIRIT OF ENTERPRISE IN TRADE AND MANUFACTURE THE 

STRUGGLE FOR A NEW CONSTITUTION AND ITS FINAL SUCCESS 

THE DISESTABLISHMENT OF THE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHES 

AN ACCOUNT OF THE GREAT OHIO MOVEMENT THE EXPERIENCES 

OF SOME WATERBURY EMIGRANTS. 

THE opening years of the period at which we have now arrived 
have been called with truth "the most critical period in 
American history." The surrender of Cornwallis occurred 
October 19, 1781. But the real end of the Revolutionary war dates 
from Washington's proclamation of a cessation of hostilities, April 
19, 1783. 

Often as the story has been told in these modern days, the full 
significance of the crisis that followed the close of the Revolution- 
ary war is still far from being popularly appreciated. The jeal- 
ousies which separated state from state, the vast distances which 
divided the remoter portions of the country, the rude facilities for 
travel, the varying views inherited and developed of the several 
sections, and the natural fear shared by all of the encroachments 
of a central power if one were constituted, combined to strengthen 
a spirit of division which boded ill for the hopes of those who, like 
Washington, cherished the dream of national unity. It is hard for 
us of to-day to realize the actual conditions of travel at that time 
in New England and the only occasional means of communication 
which existed. John Fiske tells us that "in 1783, two stage coaches 
were enough for all the travellers, and nearly all the freight be- 
sides, that went between the two cities of Boston and New York." 
Forty miles was a good day's journey, starting at three o'clock in 
the morning and ending at ten o'clock in the evening, " if the roads 
were in good condition." Such a journey was not only tiresome 
and slow, but hazardous as well. Says Mr. Fiske : * 



"The Critical Period of American History," page 6i. 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 489 

Broad rivers like the Connecticut and Housatonic had no bridges. To drive 
across them in winter, when they were soUdly frozen over, was easy; and in pleas- 
ant summer weather to cross in a row-boat was not a dangerous undertaking. But 
squalls at some seasons and floating ice at others were things to be feared. More 
than one instance is recorded where boats were crushed and passengers drowned, 
or saved only by scrambling upon ice-floes. 

If it took a week or ten days to make a journey of this kind 
from Boston to New York, the means of postal communication were 
equally slow and uncertain. Says Professor Dexter of Yale in his 
paper entitled " New Haven in 1784" : 

Post-riders took letters twice (or in severe weather, once) a week to New York, 
doing a large commission business, to the benefit of their own pockets, by the way. 
The return mails from New York divided at New Haven, one going each week via 
New London and Providence to Boston, the other taking the inland route to the 
same destination by Hartford and Springfield, and by each route there was a 
return mail weekly. 

Professor Dexter notes that the New Haven post-office was "the 
receiving-office for all the inland region not served by the Hart- 
ford, New York and New London offices." He adds that " thus 
not only all letters for such near points as Cheshire, Wallingford, 
and Waterbury, but all for towns as far off as Litchfield and New 
Milford, were left in New Haven to be delivered to any one bound 
for those parts." If no Waterbury man stopped to get the letters 
received in New Haven for his town, for example, these letters 
were advertised in the New Haven newspaper. They were sent to 
the dead letter office at Philadelphia if the advertisement failed in 
three months to discover those to whom they were addressed. 

When we consider how uncertain was postal communication 
at this period, how completely out of touch were even adjoining 
parts of the country, the growth of the influences that made for 
disunion is not to be wondered at. It is perhaps easy to understand 
the hostility between Connecticut and New York, but it is much 
more difficult to understand the similar hostility between Connecti- 
cut and Massachusetts, communities derived from the same source 
and governed by the same purpose. New York, for example, laid a 
duty on Connecticut fire-wood, a business which brought in no 
small income to the thrifty Yankees. In retaliation the business 
men of New London, in mass-meeting assembled, unanimously 
agreed to suspend all commercial intercourse with New York. On 
the other hand, when in 1785 the other three New England states 
virtually closed their ports to British shipping, Connecticut not 
only threw hers wide open, but followed this up by laying duties 
upon imports from Massachusetts. These incidents illustrate how 



4po HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

strong- was the feeling of hostility of state toward state without 
regard to neighborhood or, as in the case of Massachusetts, simi- 
larity of origin. 

Then it must be remembered that the country which had been 
drained by the exhausting war had very generally increased the 
evils of poverty by the experiment of inflation. Connecticut and 
Delaware are the only states among the thirteen that escaped the 
paper money craze and the consequent depression after it was over. 

Without going further into the details of existing conditions, it 
may be interesting to sketch hastily the remedy which was found 
and the prominence of Connecticut in the task of discovering the 
remedy. As will be remembered the proposition of Washington 
for a convention to consider means for improving the navigation of 
the Potomac grew, as he in his far-sightedness had anticipated that 
it might and hoped that it would, into the movement which led to 
the assembling at Philadelphia in May, 1787, of the Federal con- 
vention which framed the constitution. The delegates to this con- 
vention from Connecticut were Oliver Ellsworth, afterward chief- 
justice of the United States, Roger Sherman, and William Johnson, 
afterward president of Columbia college and a fellow of the Royal 
society. The first rock upon which the deliberations of the conven- 
tion seemed likely to split was the question whether membership 
in the Federal Congress should be apportioned according to popula- 
tion or according to states. Naturally the former plan was favored 
by the larger colonies, and the latter by the smaller. When things 
looked darkest Oliver Ellsworth and Roger Sherman suggested 
what is known as " the Connecticut compromise," which was finally 
adopted in substance. Franklin's pithy comment on it was that 
" when a joiner wishes to fit two boards, he sometimes pares off a 
bit from both." By this compromise it was decided that the mem- 
bership of the lower house of the Congress should be determined 
on the principle of population, while the membership of the upper 
house should be determined upon the principle of statehood. With 
this obstacle to harmony removed an important advance was made 
toward the possibility of union. A little later, when the question 
at issue was the method of electing the president, Mr. Ellsworth 
was one of those who suggested the device of an electoral college. 
Still again, when the convention was at a loss what to do in case of 
a failure to choose a president by the electoral college, whether 
such a choice should be given to the Senate representing the states 
or to the House representing the popular vote, Roger Sherman came 
forward with a compromise, which was carried, to this effect, that, 
in such a case, the House should elect the president, but that the 



AN' ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 491 

vote in the House should be taken by states, and not by a simple 
counting of members. The device of the Federal Supreme Court 
to interpret the constitution, the distinguishing feature of the 
American system of government, which is without a precedent in 
history, was shaped largely in a committee of which Mr. Ellsworth 
was a leading and influential member. 

From this hasty review we are able to appreciate the important 
part played by the representatives of Connecticut in framing the 
constitution of the United States. Connecticut also had the honor- 
able distinction of being the fifth state to ratify the adoption of the 
constitution (by a vote of 128 to 40), the ratifying convention being 
in session for only five days. It would be gratifying if we could 
find traces in the local records of the interest taken by Waterbury 
in the exciting events and important discussions which were the 
birth-throes of a nation. We know indeed that John Hopkins and 
John Welton were the delegates from Waterbury to the convention 
which did its business so rapidly in ratifying the new Federal con- 
stitution, over which the conventions in many other states Avrangled 
with much tediousness and little patriotism. But the names of 
these delegates constitute almost all the information now at hand 
in regard to this important matter. 

Indeed, one of the curious things in studying our local history 
is the absence of evidence bearing upon the relations of Waterbury 
to the general trend of history-making events. Elsewhere the story 
is told of the contributions of Waterbury to the war of the Revolu- 
tion. But when we search for local testimony of the local effects of 
the war, what we find is of small significance. It is recorded that 
on December 8, 1783, Col. Phineas Porter, Michael Bronson and 
Dr. Isaac Baldwin were chosen a committee to "appertain " — which 
probably means " ascertain " — the sum paid by each class in town 
" for raising recruits into the Continental army for the last three 
years," and to report to the next meeting. At the next town meet- 
ing Ira Beebe was added to this committee, and there the matter 
apparently dropped. There is also reported the curious case of 
three brothers, Ozias, Cyrus and Zibe Norton, who were fined ;^5 
apiece for failing to perform a tour of duty when drafted into the 
Continental army. The town ordered a discretionary committee 
to examine these five-pound notes to see whether the town treas- 
urer would be justified in accepting them. He probably was, as no. 
more appears about the matter. On April 12, 1784, this curious 
minute appears in the record: 

Voted: That the selectmen dispose of pots, tents, and camp equipage, belonging 
to the to\vn, to the best advantage of the town, at their discretion. 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

492 

These insignificant, even puerile, items constitute the sum total 
of our official knowledge of the effect of the Revolution upon 
Waterbury. The last of the three, that concerning the disposition 
to be made of the supplies left on the hands of the town at the close 
of the war, illustrates the spirit of Yankee thrift which dominated 
the conduct of public business in those days. This may perhaps be 
called significant, as it shows how painstaking was the economy 
then practiced in public affairs. That we are denied any larger 
view, in the local records, of the relation of the community to the 
world outside is a matter of no small regret. 

Turning to the physical conditions of Waterbury at the begin- 
ning of our period (1783) it may be described as a town thirteen 
miles in length, with a population of over 2000 and less than 3000. 
The process of disintegration by the splitting off of settlements 
within its borders had already begun, Three years before, in 1780, 
Westbury (now Watertown) had been set off, and in the division 
Northbury (now Plymouth) had gone with Westbury. Waterbury 
had thus been deprived of more than half of her population. In 
1774 the number of inhabitants in the whole town was 3526. This 
was a very respectable number as populations were reckoned in 
those days. For example. Professor Dexter states in his pamphlet, 
already quoted, that in 1784 New Haven had 7960 inhabitants, 
and the number must have been considerably smaller ten years 
earlier when the Waterbury figures are given above. This shows a 
closer approximation in size between Waterbury and New Haven 
than one would have supposed to be probable. In 1790 Waterbury 
had 2937 inhabitants and Watertown 3170, a total of 6107. This is 
an increase, taking Waterbury and Watertown together, of 2581 
inhabitants in sixteen years, which included the war period; or an 
increase of seventy-three per cent. The larger part of this increase 
was probably in Watertown. 

The causes which led to the splitting off of these settlements 
from the original centre were largely ecclesiastical, and are treated 
more at length in another chapter. It is interesting to note that 
these town secessions always followed the same order of process. 
First, there was a demand for what were called "winter privileges;" 
next, came the establishment of an ecclesiastical society; then at 
last the settlement, of which the church was the centre, became an 
independent town. By the phrase "winter privileges" was meant 
the privilege of having an independent minister in a particular set- 
tlement during the winter months. The inhabitants of such a set- 
tlement were thus relieved from going a longer distance to church, 
and of paying their share toward the support of the minister of the 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 



493 



town — it being of course remembered that at this time the salaries 
of Congregational ministers were raised by assessing members of 
the society according to their showing in the grand list, their 
church being a state church. As the greater burden was thrown 
upon the rest of the town by granting "winter privileges" to any 
special settlement, the request for them was naturally opposed by 
the town. This opposition was increased when the settlement 
asked for the privilege of supporting its own minister all the year 
round, and of being relieved of contributing at all toward the sup- 
port of the town minister. The last step, the founding of an 
entirely independent town as distinct from an ecclesiastical society, 
of course threw heavier burdens upon the original town, and was 
still more strongly opposed. 

The first settlement to follow the example set by Watertown was 
Farmingbury (now Wolcott). Farmingbury had obtained independ- 
ent church rights, that is, was an independent ecclesiastical society, 
as early as 1770. It was seven years after Watertown obtained its 
independence, and seventeen years after it had itself secured its 
own church rights, that is, on December 26, 1787, that a memorial 
was presented from Farmingbury asking Waterbury to consent 
"that Farmingbury make application to the next General Assembly 
to be made into a distinct town and awarded to one county." The 
memorial adds : 

And considei'ing that nature has formed said parish in such situation as makes 
it very inconvenient for us to be annexed to any other town, we therefore flatter 
ourselves that you will not fail to grant us our reqiiest. 

The town of Waterbury appointed a committee to consider the 
memorial of Farmingbury, which that committee proceeded to do 
for some six weeks. On February 5, 1788, this committee found 
itself in doubt "as to the expediency" of granting the above request 
"on any consideration whatever." This was rather a high-handed 
way of treating the would-be seceding town and must have been so 
regarded by the Farmingbury people. At any rate, not long after 
this a memorial was presented to the General Assembly by Farm- 
ingbury asking to be incorporated as a town "in another county." 
Something more than four years after the first Farmingbury 
request was made of Waterbury, or in April, 1792, the selectmen 
appointed a committee to treat with a Farmingbury committee. By 
the next October the town voted to give up opposition to the wish 
of Framingbury, but on these conditions, the date being October 8 : 

I. Society of Farmingbury within eight days to give to the rest of the societies 
in Waterbury a legal acquittance of all their right in the public, ministerial and 
school moneys, and other property. 



BISTORT OF WATERBURY. 
494 

2 Secure to the remaining societies twenty pounds lawful money as an equiva- 
lent consideration for the support of their part of the Great Bridge of the Great 
river on Woodbury road [what is now the West Main street bridge]. 

3. Become bound to support their equal proportion to the grand list of all the 
town poor, or that may be such at the time their memorial shall be granted. 

4. Become bound to pay their proportion according to list of all debts that have 
occurred during their continuance with us. 

Three and a half years later, or in the spring of 1796, Farmingbury 
was made a distinct town by the name of Wolcott, and Waterbury 
" appointed a committee to settle and adjust all matters and con- 
cerns" between the two towns.* 

Oxford was the next settlement to secure independence of 
Waterbury. It won its victory in three years and a half, while the 
struggle of Wolcott lasted nearl}^ nine years. It was on April 29, 1793, 
as related in Bronson's " History," that Joseph Hopkins, as agent for 
Waterbury, was directed to oppose the application of the society of 
Oxford to the General Assembly for town privileges. Two years 
and a half later, in October, 1795, Waterbury again voted to resist 
the attempt to obtain independence which had been renewed by 
Oxford. A third attempt the following spring was met by similar 
resistance. The following autumn, in October, 1796, Oxford 
obtained the desired act of incorporation. 

The case of Middlebury, which follows that of Oxford, is typical 
of the process of separation already described: first, "winter priv- 
ileges," then an independent society, then an independent town. 
It was in 1786 that these winter privileges were established at West 
Farms (now Middlebury), an agreement having been reached with 
the Waterbury ecclesiastical society to allow preaching there for 
eight Sabbaths of that winter. The next winter the sum of jQg was 
appropriated for pajung for these winter privileges. Three years 
after, or in 1790, West Farms and the adjoining portions of Wood- 
bury and Southbury were made into a distinct society under the 
name of Middlebury. The church was organized in 1797. Its first 
pastor was the Rev. Ira Hart, who was installed in 1798, and its first 
deacons were Seth Bronson and Nathan Osborn. Church independ- 
ence having thus been firmly established, town independence was 
naturally next desired. In 1800, or three years after the organiza- 
tion of the church, the society of Middlebury petitioned the Gen- 
eral Assembly for an act of town incorporation. Again Waterbury 

* Da the west side of Chestnut hill in the woods by the side of what appears to be an old highway or 
wood road, B. F. Rowland found a stone marked May 17, 17 — , an original corner (the southwestern corner) 
of Farmingbury society. It is now the town corner, having been so made in 1801. The slab, resembling an 
old gravestone, is supported by other stones. On it are the letters R. W. for Richard Welton, S. R. for 
'Street Richards, and A. B., perhaps for Amasa Beecher. 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTIOm 



495 



is ready with its futile opposition. On May 22, in anticipation of 
the expected — the Middlebury petition was presented to the Gen- 
eral Assembly in June — "Joseph Hopkins, Esq., and Mr. Richard 
Welton " were authorized by the town to secure an accurate survey 
of Waterbury and of the Waterbury river (its length through the 
limits of the town), in order the better "to enter a defence against 
the petition of Middlebury." At the same time that these gentle- 
men were appointed, Waterbury, perhaps learning wisdom by expe- 
rience and perhaps not, chose a committee to confer with the Mid- 
dlebury memorialists and "hear their propositions." This com- 
mittee was composed of Messrs. Joseph Hopkins, Noah Baldwin and 
John Kingsbury. On October i, 1801, Waterbury again voted in 
town meeting to oppose Middlebury in her petition. On September 
20, 1802, special agents were appointed by Waterbury to go before 
the legislature and press the opposing argument as strongly as pos- 
sible. So the fight went on with varying success for five years 
until October, 1807, when the act of incorporation was obtained. In 
the following November, Waterbury held a town meeting and 
appointed a committee to arrange affairs with ^liddlebury " agree- 
ably to the act of incorportion." At this town meeting Dr. Nimrod 
Hull, one of the selectmen, was "excused" and withdrew. This is 
something quite unusual, according to the town records, and prob- 
ably is to be taken as an indication of the bad feeling engendered 
by the long controversy, which very likely in its different phases 
led more or less to personal disagreements. The last record closing- 
up the Middlebury chapter reads as follows: 

Voted: To appropriate the moneys awarded by the state committee in the affair 
of Waterbury against Middlebury ($600) as a perpetual fund for supporting a bridge 
across the Waterbury river. 

There is in this use of the award which Middlebury was forced 
to pay a suggestion of the bitterness which had been stirred up 
and of a disposition on the part of Waterbury to keep that bitter- 
ness alive. 

The rights of Middlebury in the case are well set forth in her 
petition to the General Assembly of May 5, 1807. This petition 
states that there were about 175 families included in the Middle- 
bury society. Of the heads of these, in signed the petition. Out 
of these in families, eleven had the name of Bronson and four of 
Porter. In the petition it is stated that the meeting-house at Mid- 
dlebury is about six miles from the centre of each of the towns of 
Waterbury, Woodbury, Watertown, Oxford and vSouthbury. It is 
further stated that Middlebury is separated from Waterbury " by a 



r niSTORT OF WATERBURY. 

490 

rough and uninhabitable " tract of country, which forms a natural 
obstacle, making travel to the centre of the town inconvenient. 
According to the petition, the length of the Middlebury society 
at that time was about five miles, and its width about three and 
three-quarters miles. Its grand list was estimated to be $20,960.67. 

With the separation of Middlebury, we have the last of Water- 
bury 's losses from the incorporation of new towns during the period 
under consideration. It is true that Columbia (now Prospect) had 
an independent ecclesiastical society in 1797, but it did not become 
an independent town until 1827. In Salem (now Naugatuck) an 
ecclesiastical society was organized in 1773; a church was organized 
in 1781; an edifice was built in 1782, and its first pastor, the Rev. 
Abram' Fowler, was settled in 1785. But the town of Naugatuck 
was not incorporated until 1844. 

Turning from the physical conditions of Waterbury to its cor- 
porate structure, if that phrase is allowable, we first note that the 
town authority found its visible embodiment in the persons of its 
selectmen. These, acting under the instructions of the town meet- 
ings, transacted a great part of its business. One of the principal 
thino-s entrusted to them was the care of the poor, and the frequent 
litio-ation which grew up between towns over conflicting claims in 
reo-ard to public duties owed to the poor was in the main superin- 
tended by them. This function of the selectmen has been de- 
scribed at length in another chapter. So we will pass over it here^ 
simply noting, as illustrating one curious function which has been 
entirely lost in these modern days, the duty imposed upon them by 
the town meeting of December 12, 1785: 

Voted: To desire the selectmen to provide for Augur Mallery without setting 
him up at vendue the year ensuing. 

This means that the services of the unfortunate pauper were not 
to be bid off at public auction beside the whipping-post at the end 
of the Green. 

Next to the care of the poor, the most important duty devolving 
upon the selectmen was the care of the roads, determining their 
location and alterations (of course under the direction of the town 
meeting), attending to cases of encroachment and to giving leases, 
taking in charge suits brought for damages— for example, the 
claim of John Baxter for injuries he received on the Mad River 
bridge, the settling of which was referred by town meeting to the 
selectmen, December 16, 1790 — and other similar matters too numer- 
ous to mention. The selectmen also handled the public money and 
had charge of the odds and ends of town business. 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 497 

It may be interesting' to know the names of the selectmen in 
Waterbury at the beginning of our period. The town meeting of 
December 8, 1783, chose five selectmen: Col. Phineas Porter, Capt. 
Isaac Bronson, Capt. James Porter, Charles Upson and David 
Hotchkiss. The same town meeting chose Michael Bronson as 
town clerk. The question of the pay the selectmen received is an 
interesting one. On December 14, 1789, the town meeting voted 
''to desire the selectmen to do the business of selectmen, except in 
perambulating- and surveying the highways, gratis, or without fee 
or reward." The town meeting of ten days later voted " to recon- 
sider the vote requesting- the selectmen to do the business of 
selectmen gratis." The town meeting of a week after that voted 
to reconsider this last vote and to adhere to the original, or "gratis," 
vote. The selectmen evidently objected to being- paid simply with 
honors and the gratitude of the town, for the town meeting of a 
year after, on December 13, 1790, voted "to give the selectmen who 
have served the town the year past three shilling-s for each day 
they have spent in the service of the town during that time." This 
rate of pay continued to be the usual allowance to selectmen for 
years afterward. 

Though receiving so moderate a remuneration, the selectmen 
must have handled a large revenue, considering the size of Water- 
bury and the general amount of money in circulation. They raised 
a rate of fivepence on the pound by the grand list of 1783, which 
was paid in wheat, rye, Indian corn, oats, flax, beef and pork, at 
such market price as the selectmen deemed it right to accept at the 
time of payment. A rate of threepence on the pound by the list of 
1788 was payable in merchantable goods, such as wheat at six shil- 
lings the bushel; rye, three shillings and sixpence the bushel; 
Indian corn, three shillings the bushel; buckwheat, two shillings 
and fourpence the bushel; oats, one shilling and twopence the 
bushel; flax, fivepence per pound, and sheep's wool two shillings 
per pound. 

The matter of bridges comes up again and again as one follows 
the records of the town and notes the duties of the selectmen. The 
principal bridges of Waterbury are described in full in another 
chapter, but it may be interesting to note in passing a contempora- 
neous description of the river, the "Great Bridge" over which was 
the cause of so luuch trouble, to be found in President Dwight's 
travels. He writes: 

The Naugatuck river rises in the Green Mountains, in the township of Norfolk, 
near the north line of the state. Thence, in a course generally south, it passes 
through Winchester, Torrington, Harwinton, Plymouth, Waterbury and Oxford to 



o HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

Derby. Its length is about forty miles, its current rapid, and, when swollen by 
freshets, as it often is very suddenly, violent and destructive. It furnishes a great 
number 'of mill-seats, and is in many places lined with beautiful intervals. Not- 
withstanding the roughness of the country through which it passes, its bed is worn 
so deep, and to so uniform a surface, that from Waterbury northward one of the 
smoothest and most level turnpike roads in the state has been formed on its banks. 

It may be also interesting to note in this connection that during 
the Revolution the road leading through Waterbury east and west 
was a fine one, much used in army movements. 

In the work of superintending the roads the principal assistants 
to the selectmen were the ''surveyors." The term is not used in its 
modern sense, but means simply overseers, or as we should say in 
modern phrase, "bosses of the job." The number increases as we 
follow the records down. Thus, in a record of a town meeting held 
December 13, 1784, we find that thirty-nine surveyors were chosen, 
while at a town meeting held December 9, 1793, we find that there 
were fifty-nine chosen. This increase in numbers does not proba- 
bly mean any great increase in the number of roads, but simply 
that the work of road making and road mending was done more 
carefully. The citizens "worked out" their road tax, and the sur- 
veyors were the men who saw that it was properly done. At the 
town meeting of December 9, 1793, above referred to, some reformer 
raised the question whether this was the best way of doing it. 
A motion was made " to mend the highwa3^s in this town in 
future by a tax," that is, presumably, the taxpayer was to con- 
tribute money instead of his time and work. The consideration 
of this motion was postponed and it was rejected at the following 
meeting. 

How many attended these town meetings ? We have no way of 
forming any very accurate estimate. At the annual town meeting 
held the second Monday in December, 1800 (just at the end of the 
century), the vote on the proposed road from the centre of Water- 
bury to Naugatuck stood sixty-two in the affirmative and seven in 
the negative. This was probably a full meeting, but there is no 
means of determining what proportion of those who attended voted. 
Where were the toAvn meetings held? Almost invariably in the 
meeting-house of the Congregational society. But between 1787 
and 1793 we find various records of adjournments to the "com- 
pany" school-house — owned by a private corporation — and to the 
house of Capt. Samuel Judd. All the significance that attaches 
to these adjournments is probably that the meeting-house was 
undergoing repairs, or for some other reason was not in its usual 
condition to accommodate a town meetinsf. 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 4gg 

What was the time of working on the roads, the principal busi- 
ness that concerned town meetings ? There is a record that on 
December 27, 17S4, the town meeting voted "to desire the surveyors 
of highways to call out the inhabitants of the town to work in the 
highways four days in the year, two in the spring and two m the 
autumn, but not later than the last of October." A similar vote 
four years after adds that the days must be chosen " seasonably," 
and the surveyors are ordered "to make presentment of parts of 
days in all cases where people shall be guilty of late coming or mis- 
spending their time." It is very evident from this that the habit 
of shirking road work was perceptibly growing, and this may 
account for the increase in surveyors already referred to. 

As has been said in speaking of the selectmen generally, a not 
unimportant part of their duties was the disposition of cases of 
encroachment upon the highway, or of cases where the use of the 
highway was granted to individuals upon certain conditions. Thus 
on December 27, 1784, we find Joseph Hopkins complaining that 
Moses Frost has erected a dwelling house in the highway so as to 
prevent the complainant from using his only convenient lot for 
building, and that he is encouraged in this by some of his neigh- 
bors. Hopkins, the complainant, further avers that Frost will thus 
secure a legal title to the part of the highway he has appropriated 
— which, however, would have been next to impossible in law — and 
thus perpetually injure the value of his own lot. The town meet- 
ing in passing upon the case put it into the hands of the selectmen, 
instructing them to remove the house and other encroachments, or 
grant relief in some other way. A few weeks later, the town meet- 
ing received a memorial from Joseph Boardman, a shoemaker, who 
asked permission to extend his house on to the highway, as it would 
be the most convenient place for him to put a shoe-shop, and the 
town meeting granted him the permission. Two years later was 
granted the petition of Ephraim Warner, John Cossett, Benjamin 
Upson and Noah Baldwin, to obtain the lease of a certain public 
piece of ground for the purpose of building a cider mill upon it. 
Two years later, in 1789, the town meeting referred to the select- 
men the petition of Widow Martha Welton for the lease of a certain 
piece of ground near the meeting-house for her use as a garden 
"desiring them to do what appears to them just and right," but not 
to lease "said ground for a term exceeding ten years." A few 
months later the town meeting granted a lease of a small piece of 
land near his house to Noah Candee for a garden spot, but for a 
term not exceeding five years. These are t3qDical cases of encroach- 
ments on the highway which came up for disposition before the 



HISTORY OF WATEBBURT. 

town meeting, and which were often referred to the selectmen for 
final adjudication. Their decision must often have required the 
exercise of unusual good judgment to keep the peace and to pre- 
vent hard feelings. 

In this connection, as it concerns highways, it may be noted 
that the question of allowing swine to go at large was one con- 
stantly before the town meetings. It seems to have been largely 
a question of the size of the swine. Thus one town meeting in 
1788 voted to allow all swine "weighing fifty pounds and upwards" 
to 0-0 at large, while a town meeting in 1793 made "free common- 
ers " of all swine weighing " forty-five pounds and upwards," and 
of all swine imder forty-five pounds, provided that they were "well 
yoked." 

One of the minor duties of the selectmen included the charge of 
the less important articles of property coming into the possession 
of the town, for example, books. These were probably vStatutes 
such as are distributed to-day by the General Assembly, or such as 
may be obtained in the form of public documents through congress- 
men from Washington. The care which was taken in distributing 
these books, to see that they passed into the proper hands, illus- 
trates the thrift of those days and the way in which public prop- 
erty was guarded, even in the smallest matters. One vote may be 
cited as typical of many others, that of the town meeting of Decem- 
ber 13, 1784 : 

Voted : That one of the law books now the property of the town be kept in the 
town clerk's office. 

Voted : To sell the remainder of the law books at public vendue to the highest 
bidder, and that the additional Acts which shall come out hereafter will belong to 
the purchasers of said books on their paying one penny per page, the money to be 
paid into the town treasury for the use of said town. 

This public auction was, by the way, not held at the whipping- 
post, as some have suggested, but at any convenient place chosen 
by the selectmen. Auctions at the whipping-post were almost ex- 
clusively those of articles seized on execution and disposed of by 
the sheriiT. 

It may be worth while here to select a few statistics showing 
what was the wealth of Waterbury at this time, thus giving some 
possible idea of the size of the interests placed in the hands of the 
selectmen. The grand list of Waterbury in 1779, the year before 
Watertown secured its independence and took away probably more 
than half of the population, was ;^ 38,504. In 1790, ten years after 
the secession of Watertown, Waterbury's grand list was ;£ 19,722. 
In 1784, Waterbury is reported to have had 452 oxen, 1122 cows and 
heifers, 481 horses, and 60 dogs. In 1794 it had 582 oxen, 1897 cows. 



.liV^ ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 501 

and heifers, and 635 horses. These figures show but small change 
in the totals, and indicate that the town was increasing very little 
in the amount of its live stock. 

While, however, Waterbury was apparently standing still, we 
find indications in the records that business was on the increase. 
The town meeting of December 29, 1788, appointed fence-viewers, 
sealers of weights and measures, leather sealers, key keepers and 
cullers of timber. Four years later we find it recorded that James 
Smith, Cyrus Lewis and David Norton were chosen packers. Still 
later there is a minute that the county courts '* may appoint suitable 
persons, not to exceed three, to be inspectors and packers of beef, pork, 
butter and lard; also to inspect lumber, onions, hay, pot and pearl 
ashes and fish." The appointment of these new kinds of otEcials, 
the introduction into Waterbury public life of new functions, shows 
that the town is feeling the stirring of new business ambitions and 
is making ventures in the direction of outside trade. The exporta- 
tion of pork and beef, if one may use so large and Chicago-like a 
word as exportation, for whose quality these official inspectors 
were held to be responsible, was a business which was promoted 
largely through the push and enterprise of Col. William Leaven- 
worth (see Volume II, page 235), always a public-spirited citizen. 
The potash trade, too, was not inconsiderable, and 'Squire Ezra 
Bronson had a potash yard near the present site of St. John's 
church. The "cullers" of timber above mentioned had to put 
their official seals on the hoops and barrel staves which were 
packed in " shooks " and shipped to the West Indies. Thus it is 
seen there were possibilities for foreign trade here in Waterbury 
even before its great manufacturing boom had set in. 

And this reminds us that we are approaching a period, the begin- 
ning of the new century, which early developed those great inter- 
ests that have since given to Waterbury so conspicuous a position as 
a New England manufacturing centre. It would be interesting to 
know, if we only had the information at hand, what effect, if any, 
was produced here by the great events which were changing the 
world's history, the French Revolution, the rise of Napoleon, and 
the wars which altered the map of Europe. But in regard to all 
this we are left to individual speculation. We do know, however, 
of the general effect upon the country and on its trade of these 
events, producing results of local interest. The general situation 
is thus sketched by Professor Taussig, in his " Tariff History of the 
United States": 

The industrial situation clianged abruptly in iSoS. The complications with Eng- 
land and France led to a series of measures which mark a turning-point in the 
industrial history of the country. The Berlin and Milan decrees of Napoleon, and 



^02 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

the English Orders in Council, led in December, 1807, to the Embargo. The Non-In- 
tercourse Act followed in 1S09. War with England was declared in 1S12. During the 
war, intercourse with England was prohibited, and all import duties were doubled. 
The last mentioned act was adopted in the hope of increasing the revenue, but had 
little effect, for foreign trade practically ceased to exist. This series of restrictive 
measures blocked the accustomed channels of exchange and production, and gave 
an enormous stimulus to those branches of industry whose products had before been 
imported. Establishments for the manufacture of cotton goods, woollen cloths, 
iron, glass, pottery and other articles sprang up with a mushroom growth. . . . 
The restrictive legislation of 180S-15 was, for the time being, equivalent to extreme 
protection. The consequent rise of a considerable class of manufactui-ers, whose 
success depended largely on the continuance of protection, formed the basis of a 
strong movement for more decided limitation of foreign competition. 

Here then we have the real beginnings of that tariff controversy 
which has so long formed an exciting issue, more pronounced at 
some times than at others, between the two parties in the United 
States. Into this controversy it woitld of course be out of place to 
enter here, but it is interesting to note that it started from this 
"war boom," thus giving an opportunity for the development of 
a race of mechanics who have since made New England manufac- 
turing what it has become, the marvel of the country if not of the 
world. The history of the birth and growth of Waterbury's manu- 
facturing interests is told in full in our second volume. Suffice it 
to say here that Waterbury felt the stimulus which was being 
applied generally to the thriving towns of Connecticut and New 
England. It had its woollen mill (which, however, ended in failure) 
and five clock factories at one time, besides a largely increased 
trade in buttons. In his sermon entitled "Three-quarters of a Cen- 
tury; a Historical Retrospect," the Rev. Dr. Joseph Anderson says: 

In 1783, according to the grand list, there were in the town of Waterbury four 
steel and brass clocks, one wooden clock, seven watches, one " riding-chair," twenty 
ounces and ten pennyweights of silver plate and money at interest to the amount 
of £33- Judged by these various tests, the condition of our town was low.* 

But just at the opening of the century, a few enterprising men began the busi- 
ness of clock-making, and in 1802 Abel Porter & Co. entered upon the manufacture 
of gilt buttons. These industries, as you are well aware, increased rapidly in 
strength and importance; the war of 1812 gave to the button trade, especially a new 
impulse; machinery was invented for the more rapid production of wares for which 
a market stood open, and in due time wealth began to flow in. With increasing 
pecuniary ability, and increasing intelligence, came in the luxuries of a modern 
civilization. As one reform after another was accomplished in the world without, 
Waterbury felt the effect of it; and as one invention or discovery after another was 



* But does not the fact that the Company school-house or Academy was built in 1784, and that the con 
tracts for two new churches were given out in 1794, prove that Waterbury was, on the whole, prosperous, and 
had not felt greatly the effects of the hard times and the drain of the war which are reported elsewhere ? 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 



503 



appropriated by society at large, it found its way to this provincial village, estab- 
lishing a new bond between the mother-town of the Naugatuck valley and the great 
outside world. 

But not only was it a time, as Dr. Anderson has described it, of 
increased trade and manufacturing-, of increased inventions — it was 
in 1793 that Whitney invented the cotton-gin — but it was also a 
time of increased enterprise in the way of pushing g-oods out per- 
sonally into distant markets. In short, the day of the "drummer" 
was at hand, or, as he was then known, the peddler. President 
Dwight, in his "Travels in New England and New York," has 
given a graphic account of the progress of the peddler, the fore- 
runner of the modern drummer : 

The peddler's load is composed of tinware, pins, needles, scissors, combs, but- 
tons, children's books, cotton stuffs, a smaller or larger assortment to offer to his 
customers. A number set out with large wagons, loaded with dry-goods, hats and 
shoes, together with tinware and the small articles already mentioned. These 
loads will frequently cost the proprietor from one to two thousand dollars, and are 
intended exclusively for the Southern and Western States. It is frequently the fact 
that from twenty to thirty persons are employed by a single house in manufactur- 
ing and selling tinware and other articles. The workmen, furnished with a suf- 
ficient quantity of the raw material to employ them for six months, are sent by 
water in the autumn to Virginia, North and South Carolina and Georgia. They 
station themselves at some town in the interior, where the employer or agent has a 
store, well-furnished with such articles as the peddlers require. As the stock of 
each peddler is exhausted, he repairs to the store for a supply. In this way a large 
amount of goods are vended during the six or eight months they are absent. 

In commenting on the above, A. Bronson Alcott, who was him- 
self a native of Wolcott and lived there until he was nineteen, notes 
that "not less than ten peddlers from Wolcott often went south 
during several seasons. These were mostly employed by a house in 
Southington." There can be but little doubt that this constant out- 
going of peddlers from hereabouts to the south and west had an 
important thovigh probably unnoticed influence on the social char- 
acter of Waterbury and its vicinity. It is Shakespeare who says 
that "home-keeping youths have ever homely wits." Experiences 
in different parts of the country, contact with different customs 
and modes of thought, even though it were a rude, pioneer way of 
seeing the world, must have contributed not a little to enlarging 
the horizon and increasing the broadness of those early drummers 
or peddlers. And the ideas which they brought home must have 
proved stimulating to those whom they left behind in the quiet New 
England environment. 

We have already referred to the jealousies and rivalries between 
states which even went to the extent of hostile tariffs before the 



^Q^ UISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

adoption of the Federal constitution, and to the Embargo act, 
which in the end proved so strong- a stimulus to home manufac- 
tures, and we cannot leave the period of the war of 1812 without a 
passing allusion to the Hartford Convention with its famous quasi- 
endorsement of secession as a remedy in an extreme case. The 
general hatred of Jefferson in New England, because of his adop- 
tion of French philosophy, and the (unjust) belief that he favored 
France rather than England (largely on account of his hostility to 
England's Christianity), the acquisition of Louisiana, with its addi- 
tion to the strength of the Southern section overbalancing New 
England, and the tremendous damage inflicted on New England com- 
merce by the Embargo act, all combined to bring about the Conven- 
tion, which was held in Hartford between December 15, 1814, and 
January 5, 1815. It was called to consider the interests of the New 
England states in relation to the war with Great Britain. It con- 
sisted of twelve delegates frem Massachusetts, seven from Connec- 
ticut, three from Rhode Island, two from New Hampshire and one 
from Vermont, the delegates from the last two states representing 
counties. The president of the convention was George Cabot of 
Massachusetts, and the secretary was Theodore Dwight of Connec- 
ticut. Besides endorsing various demands on Congress the report 
which the Convention issued denied "any present intention to dis- 
solve the Union," but admitted that "if a dissolution should become 
necessary by reason of the multiplied abuses of bad administration, 
it should, if possible, be the work of peaceful times and deliberate 
consent." Although the declaration and demands of the Convention 
accomplished nothing beyond their endorsement by the legisla- 
tures of Massachusetts and Connecticut for the consideration of Con- 
gress, they have often been quoted as proving that the spirit of 
secession did not originate in the South. It was the taunt of Sen- 
ator Hayne of South Carolina, regarding the Hartford Convention 
and the part in it which was taken by Nathan Dane, that called 
forth perhaps the most eloquent passage of Daniel Webster's cele- 
brated reply to Hayne. 

A subject not second in importance to the effect of the war of 
1 81 2 on the business life of the state and of the town was the sub- 
ject of a new constitution. The position of Connecticut after the 
Declaration of Independence was an anomalous one. Her consti- 
tution still continued to be, despite her separation from the British 
Crown, the charter granted by Charles II. in 1662. This charter, 
although nominally proceeding from the throne, really proceeded 
from the people of Connecticut. Its first draft was, as a matter of 
fact, prepared by the General Court in Hartford. The king was 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 505 

petitioned to bestow his royal favor and grace "according to the 
tenor of a draft or instrument " that the General Court submitted 
for his formal approval, as is stated in the petition for it. And, as 
is held in Swift's " System of the Laws of Connecticut," "the appli- 
cation of the people for the charter and their voluntary acceptance 
of it gave efficiency to the government it constituted — and not the 
roval signature." Previous to the granting of the charter, the guar- 
antee of government rested on the compact which had been entered 
into between the towns originating the colony, and under whose 
authority the General Court had been constituted. The fact of 
separation from Great Britain and of the establishment of an inde- 
pendent government did not change the status of the charter as 
the constitution of the state. The General Assembly in October, 
1776, after endorsing the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 
made this additional declaration: 

That the form of civil government in this state shall continue to be as estab- 
lished by charter received from Charles II, King of England, so far as an adher- 
ence to the same will be consistent with an absolute independence of this state on 
the Crown of Great Britain. 

In the revision of the laws of 1784, in an act containing a decla- 
ration of popular rights, it is again declared that "the ancient form 
of civil government contained in the charter from Charles II, King 
England, and adopted by the people of this state, shall be and 
remain the civil constitution of this state under the sole authority 
of the people thereof." These declarations by the General Assembly 
show that recognition of the charter as a true constitution was as 
solemnly affirmed by the authoritative representative body of the 
state as it was possible to affirm it. Still, there were those who 
called in question its validity as a constitution. As early as 1782, 
says J. Hammond Trumbull in his " Historical Notes on the Con- 
stitution of Connecticut," to which we are largely indebted for the 
facts here i;sed, there appeared a pamphleteer who propounded " A 
Modest and Decent Inquiry," whether Connecticut had " strictly 
and properly speaking, any civil constitution." This pamphleteer 
stated that the declaration made by the General Assembly in 1776 
was "looked upon by the more thinking and judicious only as a 
temporary thing, until our troubles should be over and our inde- 
pendence acknowleged." When, in 1786, a bill was offered in the 
House of Representatives to reduce the number of its members, and 
objection was made that a constitutional question was thus raised 
which the General Assembly was incompetent to decide, Mr. James 
Davenport, the author of the bill, declared during the debate: "We 
have no constitution but the laws of the state. The charter is not 



5o6 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



the constitution. By the Revolution that was abrogated." Mr. 
Trumbull says, however, that "prior to 1800 the number of those 
who denied the validity of the act of 1776 and maintained the neces- 
sity or the propriety of calling a convention to frame a new con- 
stitution was very small." 

This question became soon an issue of politics. The Federalists 
upheld the doctrine that the Charter was a valid constitution. The 
Anti-Federalists, or the " Republicans " as they called themselves, 
or the " Democrats " as their opponents called them, maintained 
that the Charter was not a valid constitution. The Anti-Federal- 
ists, or Democrats, by which name we shall hereafter call them, as 
they thus soon came to be historically known, date their existence 
as a separate party, according to Mr. Trumbull, from the " Middle- 
town Convention," of September 30, 1783. This was called to 
oppose the "Commutation act" by which Congress granted five 
years' full pay to the officers of the Revolutionary army, in lieu of 
half-pay for life. The adjourned meeting of this convention, which 
presented a remonstrance to the General Assembly against the 
Commutation act, contained representatives from about fifty 
towns, a majority of all the towns in the state. This shows that 
from its very beginning the new party had at least a respectable 
basis for its existence. On the question of ratifying the Federal 
constitution in the convention of 17S8, ratification was carried by 
about a three fourths vote, 128 to 40. "This," says Mr. Trumbull, 
"nearly represents the relative strength of the two parties in Con- 
necticut at this time and for some years afterwards." Mr. Trum- 
bull gives a list of the prominent Democratic leaders of this period, 
including, as he says, " distinguished patriots of the Revolution and 
men of influence in the General Assembly." In this list are Wil 
liam Williams of Lebanon, a signer of the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence, Gen. James Wadsworth of Durham, Gen. Erastus Wolcott 
of East Windsor, and (a name that is of special interest to readers 
of this history) Joseph Hopkins, Esq., of Waterbury. 

A curious feature of the struggle now beginning is to be found 
in the sneers levelled at Connecticut conservatism. The fact that 
Connecticut was so " slow-going" as to rest satisfied with a consti- 
tution which was a relic of monarchy afforded infinite opportunity 
for jest to Democratic editors, pamphleteers and orators. These 
sneers were by no means confined to the state. Mr. Trumbull 
quotes Cheetham's paper, the Republican Watch-Toivcr of New York, 
as saying in its issue of June 17, 1801: 

The sentiments of the state [Connecticut] have been marked, as well while a 
colony as now, with a steadiness that excludes both reti'ogradation and advance- 
ment. Like an isthmus, inanimate and immovable, she bids defiance to the 



AN' ERA OF REGONSTRUCriON. 507 

meliorating progression made on both sides of her. The advancement of political 
science generated by our Revolution has neither changed her constitution nor 
affected her steady habits. ... A fanatic veneration for a pampered, deluding 
and anti-Christian priesthood, renders [her people] the dupes of their cunning, and 
subservient to their power. . . . And the citizens, really honest, but enveloped 
in superstition, are converted into instruments by the cunning of their priestly rul- 
ers, to debase themselves and to exalt their oppressors. 

In the last clauses of this remarkable tirade the really sensitive 
spot in the workings of the state government under the charter is 
at last touched. That tender spot was the irritation over the posi- 
tion as an established church which was held by the Congregational 
body. The agitation against the established church, which finally 
aroused the Episcopalians and the other non-conformists — how 
odd it seems to apply the term " non-conformist " to the Episco- 
pal church; but that was its exact status in Connecticut for many 
years — became in the end strong enough, in conjunction with the 
issue made against the charter by the Democrats as a party, to 
overthrow it and bring about the adoption of the constitution of 
1818. But this is some years in advance of the publication of the 
squib from Cheetham's paper above quoted. In the spring election 
of 1805 the principal issue was a new constitution, but the Federal- 
ists and supporters of " steady habits " easily carried the day. Soon 
came the events which led to the war of 181 2 and the inauguration 
of new industries, already described, and for a time the thoughts of 
the people were diverted from the question of Charter versus con- 
stitution. The agitation was renewed in 18 16, and reached success 
the following year. The conditions which led to the agitation 
against the established church, resulting in its overthrow, are thus 
sketched by Mr. Trumbull: 

By a colony law of May, 1697, every town and society was required to provide 
annually for the maintenance of their minister in accordance with the agreement 
made at settlement, by a tax levied " on the several inhabitants according to their 
respective estates." A minister settled by the major part of the householders of a 
town or society was, by a law passed in 1699, to be accounted the lawful minister 
of such town or society, and the agreement made with him was declared to be bind- 
ing on " all of such towns." And when in 1708 the General Assembly, by an act 
"for the ease of such as soberly dissent from the way of worship and ministry 
established by the ancient laws of this government and still continuing," extended 
to all qualified dissenters in the colony the same liberty and privileges granted by 
the toleration act of William and Mary, it was with the special proviso that this 
should not be construed " to the excusing of any person from paying any such 
minister or town dues as are now or shall be hereafter due from them." 

In 1727 an act was passed directing that all taxes collected for support of the 
ministry from members of the Church of England should be paid to the settled 
minister of that church; and if, in any parish, the amount so paid should be insuf- 



g HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

ficieiit to support the minister, tlie members of his church were authorized to tax 
themselves for the deficiency. Two years afterward, similar privileges were granted 
to Quakers and Baptists. At the revision of the laws in 17S4 [the period which we 
hav^e under consideration] the act of 170S, recognizing " established churches," was 
omitted; and in October, 1791. the General Assembly passed "an act securing 
equal rights and privileges to Christians of every denomination in this state " 
Every dissenter [meaning Episcopalians, Quakers, Baptists, and others not Congre- 
gatioiialists], who should lodge with the clerk of an ecclesiastical society a certifi- 
cate of his having joined himself to any other than the established denomination 
was, " so long as he shall continue ordinarily to attend on the worship and ministry 
in the church or congregation to which he has chosen to belong," exempted from 
the payment of society taxes for the support of public worship or the ministry. 
And all churches and congregations of dissenters so formed were empowered to 
tax themselves for maintaining their ministers, building meeting-houses, etc. 

This, it would at first seem, was a sufficient recognition of inde- 
pendence to satisfy the Episcopalians, Quakers, Baptists and other 
dissenters. But the mere fact that they had to lodge their certifi- 
cates with the clerk of a Congregational church in order to escape 
taxation was regarded by these dissenters as a badge of inferiority 
and was resented. On the other hand, those who did not belong to 
any church, and did not care to connect themselves nominally with 
any, were under the law still liable to be taxed for the support of 
the established Congregational churches. Episcopalians also had 
another grievance. The legislature's refusal to grant the powers 
and privileges of a college to the Episcopal academy at Cheshire, 
or to grant a charter for a new Episcopal college in Connecticut, 
especially when contrasted with the generosity of the General 
Assembly to Yale, made the members of that communion feel very 
sore toward the existing regime. A measure of conciliation was 
passed in October, i8t6, by which the balances due the state from 
the United vStates, on account of disbursements for the general 
defence in the war with Great "Britain, were divided up between 
the different denominations, the established church getting a 
third, the Episcopal Bishop's fund a seventh, and Yale college 
a seventh. But this division pleased nobody and the irritation 
was not allayed. In 1794, the Episcopal society here in Water- 
bury was strong enough to give out contracts for the building of a 
new church. The cpiestions, then, which agitated the Episcopalians 
and other dissenters in the rest in the state must have aroused 
no little feeling here in Waterbury. 

The final triumph of the champions of a new constitution was 
effected by an alliance made in 1S16 between the Democrats and 
the Episcopalians. In that year, a "toleration" ticket was nomi- 
nated by the opposition to the Federalists. At its head was placed 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUVTION. 509 

Oliver Wolcott, formerly a strong- Federalist, but one who had 
opposed the re-nomination of John Adams, and who had for the 
last eight or ten years approved in a general way the course of the 
Democrats under President Madison, successor of Jefferson. For 
lieutenant-governor, Jonathan IngersoU of New Haven was nomi- 
nated. He was a Federalist in good standing, but a prominent 
Episcopalian and senior trustee of the Bishop's fund. When the 
votes were counted it was found that Mr. Wolcott was defeated, 
but that Mr. IngersoU was elected, he having polled a considerable 
Federalist vote. In April, 1818, the same ticket was re-nominated 
and Wolcott and IngersoU were both elected, the anti-Federalists 
also carrying the majority of the Assistants and the majority of the 
House. This settled the fate of the old charter which had come 
down from the days of Charles II. The Democrats and Toleration- 
ists were united in favor of the new constitution, while the Feder- 
alists were divided, the agitation having become so strong that in 
a number of towns the Federal representatives were instructed to 
vote for a new constitution. When the General Assembly met in 
May, 1818, Governor Wolcott said in his message: 

If I correctly apprehend the wishes which have been expressed by a portion of 
our fellow citizens, they are now desirous, as the sources of apprehension from exter- 
nal causes are at present happily closed, that the legislative, executive, and judi- 
cial authorities of their own government may be more precisely defined and limited, 
and the rights of the people declared and acknowledged. It is your province to 
dispose of this important subject in such manner as will best promote general satis- 
faction and tranquillity. 

The House appointed a special committee to report appropriate 
resolutions under which a convention could be called for consider- 
ing a new constitution. By this report the Fourth of Jul}^ was 
chosen as the day when the freemen of the towns should elect 
delegates to the convention. Objection was raised to the choice of 
so patriotic a day for so patriotic an object on the curious ground 
that it was too much of a holiday. The animus of this objection 
was shown in the answer to it made by Col. John McClellan of 
Woodstock, who said that, although " he knew the Fourth of July 
was a merry day," he yet thought that "if the people began early 
in the morning they would be able to get through before they were 
disqualified to vote." Evidently in those days the " merriment " of 
Fourth of July consisted largely of a literal stimulating of patriot- 
ism. At any rate, the elections of delegates to the constitutional 
convention were held on July 4, 181 8, and as a result the Tolera- 
tionists controlled the convention by a considerable majority. The 
delegates from Waterbury to this convention were Timon Miles and 



HISTOET OF WATERBURT. 

Andrew Adams, the latter a Salem (or Naug-atuck) man. It met 
Auo-ust 26 in the hall of the House of Representatives in Hartford, 
and Governor Wolcott was elected president. 

The question of the establishment was disposed of in the seventh 
article of the new constitution — the article "Of Religion." Says 
;Mr. Trumbull: 

The Federalists contested its passage at every point, and succeded in modifying 
in important particulars the draft of the committee, but they could not prevent the 
complete severance of Church and State, the constitutional guarantee of the rights 
of conscience, or the recognition of the absolute equality before the law of all 
Christian denominations. 

The constitution as finally accepted was approved by a vote of 
134 to 61. It was then referred back to the towns to be voted upon 
at the town meetings to be held on the first Monday in October. 
Mr. TrumbttU says that "ratification by the people was for some 
time doubtful." It was, in its final shape, more or less of a com- 
promise and was in some respects distasteful to the Democrats, 
and might, in Mr. Trumbull's opinion, have failed of ratification 
but for the fact that many Federalist votes were given for it. Elias 
Ford was the presiding officer of the town meeting in Waterbury 
which decided the important matter of ratification. The ballots 
were written, containing simply the word " Yes " or " No." The 
result is thus recorded by the presiding officer: 

This certifies that at a town meeting legally warned and held at Waterbury on 
the first Monday of October, 1818, according to the edict of the General Assembly, 
May last, for the ratification of the Constitution formed by the Convention, the 
votes in said town were in the affirmative 191, in the negative 103. 

There was one other movement which belongs to this period in 
which Connecticut bore a prominent and honorable share. That 
movement was the great emigration to Ohio by which a new terri- 
tory was peopled with New Englanders, carrying with them to the 
then remote west their own traditions and ideals of popular govern- 
ment. The territory which thus received the best that New Eng- 
land had to give passed into the hands of the Federal government 
by the voluntary cession of their claims by New York and Connec- 
ticut. Everything to which the latter state laid claim was included 
in this cession of 1780 except 3,230,000 acres on the southern shore 
of Lake Erie reserved for educational purposes. The fund derived 
from this tract was thus applied, and is to-day, and in 1800 Connec- 
ticut surrendered all rights in this territory to the United vStates. 

At the close of the Revolution, Gen. Rufus Putnam of Massa- 
chusetts formed a plan for settling in these ceded lands the penni- 



Ali ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 



511 



less soldiers of the war, Congress to sell them the lands at a nomi- 
nal price. Congress would thus obtain an income and make to them 
some substantial return for their services which, with the treasury 
depleted as it was, it was impossible to make in any other way. 
The matter was formally taken up by Holden Parsons of Connecti- 
cut and Rufus Putnam, Manasseh Cutler, Winthrop vSargent and 
others of Massachusetts. They formed a joint stock company for 
the purchase of lands on the Ohio river and for the settlement 
there of impecunious veterans of good character. Before this com- 
pany could carry out its purpose, it was necessary for Congress — it 
should be remembered that this was in 1787 and that the constitu- 
tion was not adopted until 1789 — to formulate general principles 
for the government of the northwestern territory. The man who 
was most prominent in obtaining from Congress the necessary leg- 
islation was Dr. Manasseh Cutler, then forty-five years of age and 
a graduate of Yale. After graduation he had taken degrees in the 
three learned professions of divinity, law and medicine, and had 
gained as well a considerable reputation as a man of science. In 
addition to these advantages, he was gifted with a charm of man- 
ner and knowledge of men that made him a true diplomat in his 
skill in dealing with the members of a legislative body. The ordi- 
nance of 1787 which defined the principles of government in the 
northwestern territory — a remarkable assumption of Federal 
authority by a body so generally pusillanimous as was Congress 
then — and which in Daniel Webster's opinion produced " efirects of 
more distinct, marked, and lasting character " than probably any 
other single law by any law-giver, was in the main the work of 
Manasseh Cutler. Under this ordinance of 1787 the territory was 
governed by officers appointed by Congress, there was unqualified 
freedom of public worship with no religious tests for any public 
officials, and slavery was not permitted, although slave-owners were 
allowed to reclaim runaway slaves who escaped into the territory. 

Connecticut had already shown that alertness of spirit which 
finds a natural outlet in emigration, as attested by her settlements 
in the Genesee region and in the Wyoming valley, which last had 
caused her many bloody controversies with Pennsylvania. It was, 
then, what one would have anticipated, to find Connecticut taking 
an active part in the initial Ohio movement. One of the Ohio Com- 
pany's first bands of pioneers left Danvers, Mass., in December, 
1787. The second band followed from Hartford in the following 
January under the leadership of Col. Ebenezer Sproat. They 
encountered obstacles that would have proved insurmountable to 
less determined men. The Alleghanies were almost impassible. 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 
5 ^^ 

Gen. Riifus Putnam says in his journal that they "found nothing- 
had crossed the mountains since the great snow, and the old snow, 
twelve inches deep, nothing but pack-horses." Gen. Putnam adds : 
"Our only resource was to build sleds and harness our horses to 
them tandem, and in this way, with four sleds and men marching in 
front, we set forward." After overcoming such obstacles as these, 
the expedition finally arrived in April at what is now Marietta. 
They built, for protection against Indians, a substantial stockade 
containing a building with seventy-two rooms, where in case of 
necessity nine hundred people could be accommodated. It was 
classically christened "Campus Martins." 

The experiment thus auspiciously begun, and favored by Wash- 
ington and other leading men not interested in the company, did 
not prosper as was at first anticipated. Indian wars, besides the 
direct loss of vahiable lives, prevented the material success of the 
farmers and for a time frightened others from joining them. The 
whole movement was exposed to a merciless fire of ridicule in New 
England, which, though unwarranted, no doubt proved a strong 
deterrent to emigration. When at last Marietta had fought its way 
to an assured existence, the settlement at Cincinnati and the gen- 
eral opening up of the Western Reserve region (Connecticut's own 
peculiar domain) had proved formidable rivals. At last the special 
Ohio emigration movement is merged, as the end of our period 
approaches, in the general emigration movement to the entire tract 
included in the Northwest. 

The closeness of tie binding Connecticut to the Ohio settlements 
is well stated by Alfred Matthews in his article, "The Earliest Set- 
tlement in Ohio," contributed to Harper's Magazine for September, 
1885. Mr. Matthews says: 

The Western Reserve as a whole is essentially a reproduction of Connecticut — 
a copy in which the colors of the prototyj^e appear at once faded and freshened ; 
but Marietta is a brilliant, faithfully exact miniature of New England — a picture in 
which not only the outward form of resemblance, but the very spirit of likeness, is 
presented. . . . The traveller from Massachusetts or Connecticut, who feels a 
most uncomfortable stranger within the gates of almost any other town along the 
Ohio, finds himself at home in Marietta. If he sojourns there a few days, he dis- 
covers that the names of the people whom he meets are familiar ones in his native 
state. It requires no stretch of imagination to detect resemblances to New Eng- 
land facial types, to New England manners and to New England speech. The sub- 
stantial dwellings have a comfortable, thrifty appearance, a homely dignity of 
expression which recalls those of the older Eastern States. The stately elms which 
shade the streets and spacious door yards offer a pleasant suggestion of a New Eng- 
land village; the surrounding landscape seems but to sustain the illusion; and even 
the little steamboats upon the Muskingum are like those which ply upon the Con- 
necticut river far up in Massachusetts. 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 



513 



Mr. Matthews also notes that in the year iSoo the Muskingum 
academy was opened at Marietta, the first advanced school in the 
state of Ohio. It was presided over by David Putnam, a graduate 
of Yale and a grandson of Gen. Israel Putnam. 

Waterbury had its share in this noble pioneer enterprise w^hich 
laid deep and strong the foundations of New England life in what 
was then a wilderness. A number from this vicinity joined the 
Ohio emigration movement, encountering hardships which it is 
difficult to-day to realise in establishing their new homes in the 
forest. Among those of whose removal to Ohio we have reliable 
data — furnished by the late Mrs. Caroline A. Barnes of Tallmadge, 
O. — is Esther Upson, who was born in Waterbury in 1799, married 
Amadeus Sperry, united with the First church under the preaching 
of the evangelist Dr. Asahel Nettleton, and set out in July, 1819, 
with her family in an ox team for Tallmadge, arriving there the 
following September. Another Waterbury woman whose home was 
in Tallmadge, was Mrs. Jane Saxton. She died there in her ninety- 
ninth year, the oldest resident of the place. Two Waterbury broth- 
ers, Lucius and Abner Hitchcock, removed to Tallmadge in the 
spring of 1822. Abner's wife was a Waterbury woman, Emma, daugh- 
ter of Reuben Upson, and it is related that they began their house- 
keeping in a log house like the rest of their neighbors. Still another 
Waterbury woman, Mrs. Emeline Fenn, who removed with her 
father's family to Tallmadge in 1820, made the journey from Con- 
necticut to Ohio in an ox team. Of Ebenezer Richardson, who was 
a native of Middlebury, and who removed to Tallmadge m Febru- 
ary, 1819, it is related that he made four journeys to Connecticut on 
foot to pay visits to his old friends, and also returned on foot. On 
one of these journeys he started in company with a man who trav- 
elled on horseback. wSo good a pedestrian was Mr. Richardson that 
he reached Waterbury two days in advance of the man who had a 
horse to ride. 

These little incidents, more or less trivial in themselves, throw 
a strong light on the perils which they had to endure who tried the 
hazard of new fortunes in the days of the Ohio emigration. It 
gives us of these modern days a certain sense of appreciative near- 
ness to their noble struggles and achievements to find among them 
those who can lay claim to an original home here in Waterbury. 

With this inadequate sketch of the Ohio movement, we bring 
the history of the period to an appropriate close. It was in many 
respects the most remarkable period in our country's history. It 
saw the adoption of a new constitution, which has been the admira- 
tion of the world, and the successful launching of an experiment 
33 



HISTORY OF WATEliBURT. 

in popular government hitherto untried on any immense scale. 
It was a period which included great changes in the life of Europe 
throuo-h the French Revolution and the rise of Napoleon, and by 
those changes the life of our own country was affected to no incon- 
siderable degree. It was a period that saw the new nation hold 
equal contest with the mother country, and attain to an unexpected 
supremacy on the sea. It was a period in which the spirit of enter- 
prise and business adventure led to results which are only now 
beginning to be appreciated. It was a period in which the initial 
Avave of immigration first invaded the great west. It was a period 
which gave to Connecticut a new constitution and forever abolished 
hateful church distinctions before the law. During all the upheav- 
als of the times, the life of rural Waterbury went on in quiet 
remoteness, yet not in separation, from the great events which 
made the world over. 

SOME PROMINENT MEN OF THE PERIOD. 

Lieutenant Josiah Bronson, son of Isaac and Mary (Morgan) 
Bronson, was born in Waterbury, at Breakneck, in June, 17 13. He 
was a man of robust constitution, cheerful disposition and iron will, 
and took a prominent part in the religious, social and military life 
of the town. He belonged to a family, several members of which 
were Revolutionary officers. 

On July 23, 1735, he married Dinah, daughter of John Sutliff, 
who died the following year. He married his second wife, Sarah, 
the widow of David Leavenworth of Woodbury, May 15, 1740. She 
lived imtil August 28, 1767, and was the mother of seven of his chil- 
dren. A few months after her death, that is, on December 23, 1767, 
he took to wife Rebekah, relict of Joseph Hurlburt of Woodbury. 
After thirty years of married bliss she passed away on June 5, 1797, 
and one year later (June 12, 1798) he married Mrs. Huldah Williams, 
who survived him. He died, February 20, 1804, at the ripe age of 
ninety. (For his children see Ap. p. 26.) 

Captain John Welton, the eldest son of Richard and Anna 
(Fenton) Welton, was born January 6, 1726-7. He was a farmer of 
Bucks Hill, and had only the ordinary advantages of an English 
education. From an early period he was a prominent member of 
the Episcopal society and held the office of senior warden. At the 
beginning of the Revolutionary war he espoused the cause of the 
colonies, became a moderate Whig and was confided in by the 
friends of colonial independence. In 1784 he was appointed a jus- 
tice of the peace, and the same year was elected to the legislature, 
of which he was a useful and much respected member for fifteen 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 515 

sessions. It is said that few men were listened to with more defer- 
ence than he. He died January 22, 1816. (For his children see Ap. 
p. 151. A sketch of his son Richard is given in Volume II,pao-e 238.) 
Captain Amos Bronson, the eldest son of John and Comfort 
(Baldwin) Bronson, was born February 3, 1 730-1, at Mount Jericho 
near the Nauc^atuck river. He fitted for college with the Rev. 




7- /jr^mJO?iy 



John Trumbull of Westbury, and graduated from Yale in 1786. He 
married Anna Blakeslee of Plymouth, and having beconie through 
her influence an Episcopalian, educated his family in that faith. He 
named his eldest son Tillotson, after the distinguished Church of 
England divine of that name. 



5i6 



HISrORY OF WATERBURY. 



Captain Bronson built the turnpike road extending along- the 
banks of the Naugatuck from Jericho to Salem bridge, which in 
those days was considered an achievement of no ordinary kind. 
The new road obviated the necessity which had before existed of 
fording the stream six times, and removing twenty-five or thirty 
sets of bars in journeying between the two places which it con- 
nected. He died in September, 1819. (For his children see Ap. p. 23. 
A. Bronson Alcott, of whom a sketch is given in the chapter on 
literature, was his grandson and namesake.) 

Deacon Thomas Fenn, the son of Thomas Fenn of Wallingford, 
was born in that town in 1733, and while still quite young removed 
with his parents to Westbury. On April 19, 1760, he married 
Abiah, daughter of Richard and Anna (Fenton) Welton. He served 
as a captain in the Revolutionary war, and was a representative 
first of Waterbury, and afterward of Watertown, in the legisla- 
ture. It is a remarkable fact that he was a member of the General 
Assembly for thirty-five sessions, beginning in 1778. He was a 
justice of the peace, and held the office of deacon in the Watertown 
Congregational church for many years. Throughout his long life 
he was an influential citizen, much respected by his fellow-towns- 
men. He died August i, 1818. (For a list of his children see 
Ap. p. 50.) 

Lieutenant Jared Hill was born in North Haven in 1735. H® 
married Eunice Tuttle, who was born in the same town in 1737. 
Both were descended from the first colonists of New Haven, Eunice 
Tuttle being a direct descendant of William Tuttle. They removed 
to Waterbury in 1784, and purchased a farm on East Mountain. 
They had twelve children, all of whom, except Samuel, were born 
in North Haven. Jared Hill was a private in the French and 
Indian war and a lieutenant in the Revolutionary war, and had the 
reputation of being a good soldier. He died April 20, 1816. 

Samuel Hill, the youngest son of Lieutenant Jared Hill, was 
born in Waterbury, vSeptember 4, 1784. In 1807 he married Polly 
Brackett, eldest daughter of Giles and Sarah Brackett, who was 
born in North Haven, November 17, 1786. He was educated at the 
common schools and learned the carpenter's trade, which he fol- 
lowed in summer during his life, but taught school in winter. He 
was a fine musician and served in the capacity of fife major in the 
Second regiment from 1807 to 18 18. In the chapter on literature 
he appears also as a poet. He died April 26, 1834. After his death 
the family removed to Naugatuck, where his wife died October 8, 
1853. Both were buried in the Grand street cemetery, and their 
remains were afterward removed to Riverside. For their first 



^iV^ ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 517 

four children see Ap. p. 65. Besides these there were two others, 
Ellen Maria and Robert Wakeman. (For R. W. Hill see under 
"Architecture" in the second volume.) 

Lieutenant Aaron Benedict, the son of Captain Daniel and 
Sarah (Hickok) Benedict, was born in Danbury, January 17, 1745. 
In 1770 he removed to Waterbury, and settled in the eastern part of 
what is now Middlebury. He was a leading man of the town, and 
represented it in the leg-islature of 1809-10. He served in the 
French and Indian war, and was a lieutenant in the war of the 
Revolution. Mr. Benedict was a true type of the old-time, strong- 
minded, public-spirited man. He was possessed of much more than 
ordinary ability, and was the builder as well as an owner to a large 
extent of the Straits turnpike, in the days when turnpikes held 
the same relation to the country at large as railroads do at the 
present time. On December 13, 1769, he married Esther Trow- 
bridge, and died December 16, 1841. (See Ap. p. 18.) 

Giles Brackett (written also Brockett) was born in North 
Haven, April 30, 1761. On November 17, 1785, he married Sarah, 
daughter of Deacon Stephen Smith of East Haven. Both he and 
his wife were descendants of the first New Haven colonists, and his 
mother was a direct descendant of the Rev. James Pierpont. He 
was educated at the common schools, was bred a farmer, enlisted 
and fought in the Revolutionary war, and at its close returned to 
his farm in New Haven. In 1800 he removed with his family to 
Waterbury. He lived first at East Farms, and afterwards bought a 
farm on what is now Dublin street. He was a representative in 
the General Assembly in 1809. He and his wife were for many 
years members of the First church. They were persons of a happy 
temperament, very courteous in demeanor, generous and thought- 
ful of the happiness of others, honored and beloved by their family 
and friends. Mr. Brackett. died June 2, 1842, and his wife Novem- 
ber 27, 1841. 

Ethel Bronson was born in Waterbury, West Farms (now 
Middlebury), July 22, 1765. He was the son of Isaac and Mary 
(Brocket) Bronson, and a younger brother of Dr. Isaac Bronson 
(Vol. II, p. 861). He was a prominent citizen of the town, a justice 
of the peace and a member of the legislature for six sessions. In 
May, 1804, he removed to Rutland, Jefferson county, N. Y., and 
became the agent of his brother Isaac for the sale of lands. He 
was three times elected to the New York legislature, was judge of 
the county court in 1813, and was president of the Jefferson County 
bank. On December 30, 1787, he married Hepzibah, daughter of 
Joseph Hopkins, and died in 1825. "He was not ambitious for 



5i8 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



public office, but in those qualties that make a good citizen, a kind 
neighbor and a valued friend, he was preeminent. He was kind 
and liberal almost to a fault, yet public spirited and enterprising, 
and possessed a character marked by the strictest integrity." (See 
Ap. p. 25.) 




"■^2^^-^--2-^^.^V>-2^v 




Giles Ives was born at North Haven, April 25, 1774. On October 
9, 1799, he married Abigail Gilbert of Hamden, and soon after 
removed to Waterbury. He lived on West Main street, a little west 
of State street. He was a farmer, and a quiet man, but greatly 
respected by all who knew him. He owned land near his home on 



AN ERA OF RECONSTRUCTION. 



519 



West Main street, and State street was opened throug-h his prop- 
erty. (For his children see Ap. p. 76.) 

The Hon. Alvin Bronson, second son of Josiah and Tabitha 
(Tuttle) Bronson, and grandson of Lieutenant Josiah Bronson, was 
born May 19, 1783. He attended the district school in winter and 
worked at farming in summer until he was thirteen years of age, 
after which he spent twelve months in the family of Captain Isaac 
Bronson, being engaged as an errand boy in a small country store. 
For the next three years he was employed as clerk in the store of 
Irijah Tyrrel, in vSalem society. Afterwards for one quarter he 
attended the well known school of James Morris, Litchfield South 
Farms, and completed his education by spending a year with the 
Middlebury pastor, the Rev. Ira Hart. Thus cpialified, and before 
the age of seventeen, he taught a district school in Woodbridge. 

After serving again as a clerk for a year and half, he went into 
business as a merchant on Long Wharf, New Haven, and for four 
years conducted a successful trade with the West Indies. He after- 
wards engaged in the coasting trade on the great lakes, and with 
his partners conducted the larger part of the commerce of the 
lakes for the two years preceding the war of 181 2. They established 
a store at Oswego — which afterwards became his home — and 
another at Lewiston. During the war he was appointed military 
and naval storekeeper, and was captured with the remnant of 
stores on hand. After the war the business was resumed, and car- 
ried on until 1822. In 1822 he was elected to the New York state 
senate, and in 1829 was returned again and placed on the finance 
committee, upon which he served for three years. As chairman of 
that committee he prepared an elaborate report on capital, cur- 
rency, banking and interest, which was published as " Senate Docu- 
ment, No. 106, April 12, 1833," and attracted much attention. 

He furnished to Dr. Bronson's History of Waterbury an inter- 
esting autobiography which fills pages 450 to 455. 



CHAPTER XXXVI. 

THE LIFE OF THE PEOPLE FROM 1 783 TO 1825— THEIR MANNER OF DRESS 

AND THEIR CUSTOMS THEIR HOLIDAYS AND HOW THEY OBSERVED 

-fHEM THE WAY IN WHICH THEY LIGHTENED THEIR TOIL BY 

MAKING PLAY OF WORK THEIR OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH 

SOME DISTINCTIONS IN EARLY MORALS THEIR AMUSEMENTS PURE 

AND SIMPLE SOME OF THE PROMINENT CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 

" AGE OF HOMESPUN." 

IN the chapter preceding this we have considered the principal 
events which belong to the period from 1783 to 1825, both 
national, state and local. We may now turn from the things 
which the people did and the things which happened to them, to 
the people themselves, the manner of their life, how they dressed, 
their interests, amusements and customs. As we all know in a 
general way, the inhabitants of Waterbury early in the century did 
not fret greatly about the fashions, although they looked to France 
for them in those days just as we do to-day. The men wore broad- 
brimmed hats, broad-tailed coats with huge pockets, long waistcoats, 
breeches and worsted socks. The socks, except those of the parson 
and the doctor, which were silk, were knit at home by the wives. 
The women had small pinched bonnets,* linen short-gowns for work, 
and dresses with the waist as abrupt as possible and the skirt very 
scant. Pretty girls, however, never looked prettier than they did 
in those days, with muslin "Vandykes" over their shoulders. The 
house-mothers had .small shawls worn in the same way. Their 
garb, uncouth as it may seem to us to-day, was suited to their needs, 
and, being home-made, endured "to the third and fourth genera- 
tion." Almost every woman possessed one good silk gown brought 
from over the sea, carefully laid away in lavender in her chest of 
drawers, to be looked at on stated occasions, smoothed with a lov- 
ing hand and put by again with a half -sigh for memory's dear sake. 
Portraits taken at this date, showing the styles abroad, give dresses 

* In 180S, at the New England Methodist Conference in New London, the women had donned these 
" mode" bonnets as the proper head-gear for this solemn occasion. During the week before, the one mil- 
liner of the town had made seventeen of these, each one a little more " pinched " than the preceding; a 
minute model for them having been brought by a circuit preacher from Middletown in a snuff-box! The 
reader will remember how the elderly maiden in Longfellow's " Hyperion," having but a scant supply of 
ribbon, as she sat on the left side of the aisle, charged her milliner to " put the bow on the meetin'-house 
side of the Ininnit." 



LIFE IN THE "AGE OF HOMESPUN." 521 

much like the recent popular " princess" robe. One of these pic- 
tured ladies, in a toilet worn at Madam Washington's first reception, 
has on a huge brown hat flaring at the crown, with a heavy cord and 
tassel knotted round it above the brim. In 181 1 a woman looked as 
if clothed in a long, scant, loose gown, corded at the waist with 
many frogs a la militaire down the front. The bonnet was as much 
like a coal-scuttle as anything to which we can compare it, with an 
amazing knot of feathers over the edge, the hair bunched above the 
eyes and curled down on the cheeks like " Crazy Jane." By 1815 
the brim had spread, the crown in style like a two-quart measure 
rose with a mass of plumes on one side, and a military cape, much 
trimmed, covered the shoulders. Altogether madam looked like a 
female trooper. In 1820 the huge-brimmed hat came into vogue 
and feathers galore topped it off.* The waists were now " indi- 
cated," the sleeves being high on the shoulders and puffed to the 
wrist. A turnover collar, a knotted scarf and a heavy, brilliant 
long shawl with embossed borders were "all the go." The hair was 
parted in the middle and much be-crimped. By 1828 the milliners 
had changed the bonnet to a flaring hat, with huge puffs of hair on 
each side of the head and portentous bows wherever they could 
stick them. An over-dress, with huge sleeves, pointed cuffs, collars 
reaching out beyond the shoulders and opening over an embroidered 
skirt, made, strange to say, a very pretty costume. The military 
style of 181 1 and 1815 had passed away with the war, and a really 
lady-like garb was coming in. Does one think that these changes 
affected Waterbury ? A writer speaking of New London, which 
was a maritime town with vessels constantly going and coming, 
and thus keeping constantly in touch with the outside world, says 
that in 1S20 the women still clung to the funny little close bonnet 
fastened on with long pins, the plain linen cap with close border, 
and the short red cloak with the hood falling back. The men still 
wore enormous steel shoe-buckles and vast checkered pocket-hand- 
kerchiefs. f Would not the little inland towns pattern their style 
of dress after one which knew " what was what " in the great out- 
side world, because it was constantly " trading " with it? 

We think of those days, and rightly, as simple days, when pomp 
and show and vanity of dress were but little esteemed as compared 
with the importance in which they are held to-day. But do we not 
exaggerate the simplicity of those earlier days ? At any rate, when 
the rank and fashion of the colonial time, and even of the time 



*0ne, considered the heiglu of perfection, worn by a young belle on her first visit to the capital, would 
have held in its crown two volumes of the Waterbury History. 
•1- Miss Calkins' History of New London. 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

522 

following the inauguration of the Republic, appeared in their finest 
on some day of state, the effect was artistically brilliant much 
beyond any ordinary gathering of our own time. It must have 
aroused a spirit of pride in mere externals that savors very much 
of the same devotion to fashion which we moderns deplore. For 
example, Edmund Ouincy, in his chapter on Commencement day 
contributed to the " Harvard Book," thus describes the scene: 

The old meeting-house, which was admirably constructed to display an audi- 
ence, must have had a gorgeous effect in the days of gold lace and embroidered 
waistcoats and peach-bloom coats, of silverhilted rapiers, of brocades, of the 
"wide circumference of hoops and the towering altitude of crape cushions." I 
recollect a venerable lady telling me how she sat up all night in an elbow chair the 
night before Commencement in 1753, for fear of disturbing the arrangement of her 
hair, which had to be dressed then or not at all, such was the demand for the ser- 
vices of the fashionable coiffetir of the time. 

From this last little incident it is evident that the minor vanities 
held strong sway then in the feminine bosom, and it is not probable 
that they lost any of their seductive charm with the passing of the 
years. 

But to return from a state occasion at New England's princi- 
pal capital to the ordinary life of humbler Waterbury. We have 
spoken of materials for clothing as being raised at home. An itin- 
erant weaver* dressed other people's cloth, put up his loom and 
tossed his shuttle, in nearly every household. He was followed by 
the tailor, who twice a year made up the various garments of the 
various families. It may be interesting to note in this connection 
the cost of these humble services. We have the bill of a tailor who 
followed his craft here in Waterbury, for the years 1818-20, for the 
board and other expenses of John Morse, son of Josiah Morse, who 
began boarding, so the bill states, with the man who presented it, 
December 17, 1818. The items are as follows: 

1S18. 

Oct. 28. To making pantelloons, . . . ■ . $ -33 

To footing stockings, ..... -25 

1 8 19. 

Jan. 14. To making vest, ...... -42 

To silk and twist for vest, . . , • -12 

April 30. To cloth pantelloons and making the same, . . 2.50 

*" To the Promoters of American Manufacture": William Russell, Stocking Weaver, "is positive that if 
furnished with good yarn— slack-twisted— he can turn out in his loom gloves and stockings preferable to the 
imported." — Litchfield Monitor of March b, i793- 

James Sutton, one of the first Irishmen who came to Waterbury to live, was a weaver. In 1813 he worked 
for Austin Steele. Tommy Hood of the same trade fled to Waterbury, having got into trouble with the gov- 
ernment. 



LIFE IN TEE "AGE OF HOMESPUN" 



523 



June S. 



Nov. 10. 



1820. 
Jan. 12 

May 5. 



June S. 



To four yards of cotton shirting, 33 cents per yard, 
To making two cotton shirts, .... 
To one yard and a half of striped linnen and making the 

same, ....••. 
To two yards of woollen cloth, one dollar and 33 cents 

per yard, ...... 

To trimings and making pantelloons, 

To one pair of woollen stockings, 

To two yard and quarter of woollen cloth, 

To making coat , . 

To 14 gilt buttons, ..... 

To silk twist and thread for coat. 

To cloth for pantelloons and making, 

To two yards and half of linnen cloth, thread and making 

the same, ...■•• 

To four yards of cotton cloth, thread and making. 
To triming and making vest, . . . ■ 



1.32 
.60 



2.66 
■ 33 

• 50 

3-95 

150 

•50 

.20 

1.50 

1. 00 

1-75 

•33 



$ 20.50 
To board and schooling at ten shilling per week two 

years ending Sept. 17, 1820, . ■ • 173-33 

To boots and shoes found by Andrew Bryan, . 10.00 



Total, 



$203.83 



To provide shoes for the household, every hide was saved and sent 
to the tanner, being returned in assorted leather. The ambulating 
son of Crispin arrived at set seasons with his lapstone and awls, 
and did not leave until every foot was shod. We have said that the 
woollen stockings were knit by " women-folk " at evening. Light 
was expensive in the remote days of which we write, and farmers 
and farmers' wives were too tired, even if they had the desire, to 
sit up very late. Generally, unless in case of illness or death, small 
towns like Waterbury were darkened ere daylight had fairly fled. 
As for knitting, however, experts could "set on," or "bind off," or 
"round a heel," by the sense of touch alone. The tallow "dips," 
which were the sole dependence for lighting, were expensive, 
although they were home-made. The smallest odds and ends were 
therefore preserved and burnt out on sharp points provided for the 
purpose, set on a spring in the handsome brass candlesticks which 
had a place in so many households, heirlooms from beyond the sea. 
Flax was raised and put through the various processes of rotting, 
hackling, dressing, and last of all, spinning. The little wheel was 
a familiar friend, and ladies of wealth and position did not scorn to 
produce the finer kinds of thread, though in large families the burden 



p,, HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

5-4 

of this work was generally borne by some itinerant spinner.* The 
women of those days also had the sensible habit of finding pleasure 
in work. The girls of the period were often accustomed to take 
their wheels with them when they went to pay a visit, and thus for 
a dav or two, perhaps longer, hostess and guests would pass the 
hours of spinning in social chat. 

Cotton, that is, raw cotton, was as yet a curiosity, and it was not 
known whether it grew on a plant or on an animal. f Every farmer 
(and Waterbury folk were principally agricultural at this time) pos- 
sessed a few sheep, and the wool from these was spun at home. 
Merinos had become a craze and fortunes were made and lost in a 
day. A ram was sold for $rooo and a ewe for $ioo. Col. Humphrey 
of Humphreysville (now vSeymour) imported 300 in 1810. The 
Hon. N. B. Smith of Woodbury won a fine gold medal as a prize 
for a ram exhibited at one of the annual cattle fairs of that day at 
Brookline, Mass. These fairs would be counted remarkable even 
to-day. The cattle shown were often of the finest breeds and came 
from remote parts of the several states. Returning from the sheep 
to the spinning of their wool in the household, we find that the 
most ordinary sight, as one entered, was the dye-tub which stood in 
the deep chimney corner, well covered over. On cold winter nights 
it formed a most desirable, cosy seat, which was well appreciated 
by the young people. vS. G. Goodrich tells us : 

When the night had come and the rest of the family had gone to bed— they did 
not " retire" in those days— the dye-tub became the anxious seat X of some lover 
whose lady fair sat demurely in the opposite corner. Some of the " first families 
in Connecticut " can tell of such courtships. 

As was natural, the houses of those days were as unpretentious 
as the manner of living. Once in a while we find a house which 
might be called a " mansion," and contained a ball room, but resi- 
dences of this class were conspicuous for their rarity. Perhaps as 
good a type as any of the better class of houses was that of Mr. John 
Nichols. Afterward remodelled it became the residence of the late 

* John McCloud, the first Scotchman to locate in Waterbury, early in the century, was a flax-draper. 

It is pleasant to record the fact that she who did the spinning with such amazing skill in the New 
England cottage at the Centennial at Philadelphia in 1S76, and also at the " Wayside Inn " at the World's 
Fair of 1893 in Chicago, is a resident of Waterbury. She was the cynosure of all eyes at both those great 
exhibitions. People who meet her to-day, when her spinning-wheel is not in sight, are surprised to find her 
anything but aged and snow-white of hair. With flying fingers and swift feet she makes the "big wheel " 
sing and whirl merrily. Those who have the good fortune to stand near her on such an occasion have the 
chance of beholding the very " poetry of motion " in the active person of Miss Mary L. Tower. 

+ In 1894 we raised 67-iooths of the world's production of cotton for that year. 

$ No chaperone was required then or dreamed of, unless, perchance, the coming in of the " father" to 
wind up the clock might, as it creaked aggravatingly, be considered a suggestion of watchfulness over a 
pretty daughter. Within the dye-tub itself, associated with so many possibilities of romance, was the "blue" 
for the linsey-woolsey short-gowns, aprons and mixed stockings. 



LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN:' 



S^S 



Dr. James Brown and stood on the site selected for the new High 
school.* This house, it is said, as well as several other houses of 
the class, was copied from an old house in Farmington, built by an 
officer in Burgoyne's army who was quartered there after the sur- 
render.f There were few wealthy people in Waterbury at this 
period, although the story is probably apocryphal that but one man 
in the town could get his note discounted at the New Haven bank. 
Those were the days when $20,000 was looked upon as a fortune. 
Socially speaking, Farmingbury (now Wolcott), West Farms (now 
Middlebury), and Westbury (now Watertown), were probably in 
advance of Waterbury. They were conceded to have greater 
wealth. A curious evidence of this fact is found in the superiority 
of the Watertown stores, for it was generally customary, at least in 
the earlier part of our period, for people here to go to Watertown 
to do their shopping. It took very little, judging by our standard, 
to make one "well off." The family of the widow Tamar Hotch- 
kiss, living on East Mountain, is instanced. This family had money 
at interest — the widow having received a pension for her husband, 
who had been a soldier in the Revolution — owned the only cider 
mill in the neighborhood, and bought wheat flour by the barrel. 
The "general run" of people at this time were satisfied with rye 
flour and corn meal and an occasional ten pounds of wheat, bought 
for some special occasion, such as Thanksgiving. This illustrates, 
in a homely way, how little it then took to live in comparative 
luxury. Carriages of any sort were very rare in the early part of 
the nineteenth century. There was but one wheeled gig in Water- 
bury for a long time. Pleasure coaches were all imported. When 
Pierpont Edwards drove through the state in 1798 in a four-wheeled 
chariot, he attracted more attention than would a coaching party 
of New York " swells " in a very remote country village to-day. 
Most of the travel that was not on foot was on horseback, the 
women, as a rule, using pillions and riding behind. A little 
later, the "riding-cloth" came in. This was a large piece of cloth 
attached to the back of the saddle. When in use it was spread out 
on the horse's back and the extra rider sat on it, facing the animal's 
tail. When not in use it was rolled up at the back of the saddle. 
Whole families went to church on horseback, "ride and tie," as it 
was called. The father and older children started ahead, the mother 
and the smaller ones following on the back of the family horse. 
When the latter overtook the pedestrians there was often an ex- 

* See Vol. II, page 346. 

+ There was a pretty one and a half story house with a veranda — something of an exception — with 
dormer windows, where the building of the Young Men's Christian association now stands, as noted by Mr. 
Kingsbury. 



^g HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

change, the mother taking her turn at walking. There were few 
social distinctions in those days, at least in this part of New Eng- 
land. In Massachusetts and in New York, as well as in New Hamp- 
shire, the lines were drawn more strictly. The minister was the 
most 'conspicuous social figure in the ordinary New England town. 
When he jogged by in decorous fashion on horseback, the children 
were expected to form in line and make their " obeisance." His 
pastoral calls were events, and his word was largely law in many of 
the more important affairs of the town. He often stayed in the one 
parish during his life and commanded general respect, mingled 
sometimes with more or less of awe. The descriptive phrase "a 
pope in his parish " is not without literal truth when applied to 
this period. The other two learned professions had a prestige then 
which they have almost entirely lost to-day. A man who repre- 
sented a college education stood for social superiority because of 
that fact— something which we no longer accord to mere learning. 
This is in its way a tribute to the place which "brains" held in the 
general esteem at that time. If one were to assign a social rank to 
the three professions, the minister must come first, the lawyer 
second, and the doctor third. All, as a rule, were more or less 
farmers, especially the minister, who eked out his narrow income 
by cultivating his land. It is stated that one country clergyman 
of this period, whose salary was only $500 a year, started suc- 
cessfully in the world a family of two sons and six daughters, 
giving each daughter $500 as a dowry when she married. This 
was accomplished by thrift, by prudent management of the farm, 
and by taking boys to board and fitting them for college. This 
case is typical of many other clergymen of this period. When 
the minister travelled, the houses of his brother ministers were 
always thrown hospitably open to him, and the drain on his 
resources was small. The doctor, nearer the end of the period 
under review, made his rounds in a two-wheeled sulky, a vehicle 
which had room for himself alone and for his supplies of medicine 
Life was not then, any more than now, a ceaseless round of routine 
toil. There was the occasional break, looked forward to no doubt 
with anticipation, as the seasons brought around the great func- 
tions of the year. Such were, in homely phrase, butchering-time, 
candle-dipping day, soft-soap boiling, " sugaring-off," and other 
similar opportunities of fun and frolic. These were important 
events in every small town and every household. Small families 
would club together and share one "beef critter" among them.* 

* The itinerant butchers would only do their work at certain phases of the moon. Otherwise the meat 
"would shrink in the pot." 



LIFE IN THE "AGE OF HOMESPUNS 527 

Other families would each own a whole one, as their means per- 
mitted. The larger farmers who had outside " help " would 
often hang one to freeze solid "for fresh." It would remain so all 
winter. On occasion the axe was resorted to, literally to hack out a 
dinner or so. A second one would be " salted down." In midwinter 
the hogs were "prime " for slaughter, if there was a good body of 
clean dry snow * on the ground. On a certain day by early dawn the 
work was begun. By nightfall the bodies were hanging in the out- 
buildings to cool off. The next day they were cut up and salted, 
certain portions being set apart for the toothsome sausage, others 
for head-cheese, souse, ribs and roasts, and the tails for the young- 
sters to cook in the ashes. Such hams are not known nowadays ! 
They were rubbed three times, at intervals of two weeks, with a 
mixture of salt, sugar and spices in exact proportion, resting be- 
tween times in a large cask, the drippings that oozed from them 
being poured over them every day. When such ceremonies were 
to take place, huge fires were lighted early in the big out-kitchens. 
Heavy brass kettles were hung on the long-armed and many-hooked 
cranes, f and an immense boiler sent up volumes of steam, which 
froze on the rough-hewn beams, despite the roaring flames. On 
butchering day, ghostly carcasses hanging to the beams in their 
pink beauty were all that remained by nightfall to tell of the 
tragedy of the past twenty-four hours. All the year roiind, a huge 
open cask, raised above the ground, stood full to the brim of wood 
ashes, with several spouts at the base. The soft rains of heaven 
fell upon the ashes and formed the leach used in making the soap 
of our ancestors. In the soap-making season, this product of ashes 
and rain and clear brook water was poured into the big kettles to 
do its work. That work consisted in eating up to the smallest 
morsel the grease that had been saved and clarified throughout the 
previous year for this special purpose. The work having begun, 
you can see in the whirling mass that the grease is proving non- 
resistant. Over and over it turns. After a certain point is passed, 
it thickens into a marble-like brown mass. An expert stands by to 
watch it, for it is evident that the "soap is comin'." The skilled 
eye and the quick hand know what to do — to add more leach, to 
boil further, or at the proper moment to dash in cold water and give 
the mass a sudden chill. See how it feels this ! It whirls and 
whirls, hesitates, gives one last long gasp, and the year's supply of 
soap has "come." 

* Spareribs and certain other cuts were packed in snow in barrels, and set where they would keep frozen 
for weeks, a first-class " cold storage " being thus provided. 
+ See Longfellow's "Hanging of the Crane." 



g HISTORY OF WATEBBUBY. 

Candle-dipping- day was an equally busy one in the late fall. A 
monster brass kettle received the tallow, which was put through 
two scaldings and skimmings. When strained, this was lifted off 
the fire and placed in two deep vessels one-third full of water. The 
wicks were prepared the evening before, men, women and children 
making merry over the work. They cut the wicking into lengths 
and twisted these sharply one way, then slid them, doubled, over 
the long, slender candle-rods, when they themselves twisted readily 
in the opposite direction. With the two rods between the fingers 
of each hand, the solemn process of dipping began. Down into 
the melted tallow and up into tne air went the wicks. At first very 
little tallov adhered, but soon, dip following dip, one began to see 
that candles were forming. "Six to a pound" and long and thick! 
Before a great while others must be dipped. New workers took 
hold and gave the first a chance to rest their aching arms. When 
all this was over, long racks of rods hung heavily laden with candles 
between rails raised on bricks. The end had been reached and the 
supply of light, such as it was, had been produced for the ensuing 
year. The new " dips " were now ready for use. 

When the days grew longer, and it " froze o' nights and thawed 
daytimes," they watched the maple trees as they began to drip from 
the point of every little twig. Then the elder spouts, which the 
boys had whittled out in the evenings by the blaze of the big fire, 
were taken out, examined and made ready. Every farmer had at 
least a few maple trees, and those of a certain age were tapped, sev- 
eral auger holes being bored, above and below, four or five feet 
from the ground. If the trees were of generous girth, a second line 
of holes was usually made at the base. Into these the elder spouts 
were inserted and pails were hung beneath them. In warmer days 
the pails filled fast. Every passer-by was privileged, even expected, 
to stop and take a drink. All day, tmtil the evening chill checked 
the running, the men and boys of the farm carried in the flowing 
pails, and emptied them into barrels, where by nightfall there was 
usually a sufficient supply for boiling down. Then merry groups 
gathered in the big out-kitchens where, since mid-afternoon, fires 
had been roaring under the hugh brass kettles. These were no 
ordinary fires, for into them went the selected odds and ends of the 
wood-pile, seasoned for the purpose. There were moments of diver- 
sion from the work in hand. Potatoes and corn were roasted, 
apples toasted, and prophetic nuts* were placed on the andirons. 

♦The prophetic nuts were placed on the andirons in pairs and were anxiously watched. Some of these 
couples hopped apart, some burst apart, some would jump into the fire together. Rarely, one would pop 
out on to the bare floor, its nute followinjj quickly after. This was considered an omen of future marriage. 



LIFE IN TEE ''AGE OF B03IESPUW." 529 

Presently there was a hush. The chief of ceremonies holds vip his 
hand. The exciting moment has come when the syrup is ready for 
" stirring- off." Four stalwart men lift off the big kettles and set 
them on bricks placed on the floor. With long, paddle-shaped 
sticks, they stir the seething, ropy mass. Slower and slower move 
the paddles, as the resistance of the syrup increases. This marks 
the end of the process of granulation, and sugar-making labors for 
this season are over. If "sugaring off" proved a merry time in 
the spring, "commoning day" in the fall was looked forward to 
with eagerness, at least by the small boys. This was the time after 
the grass had been cut and the crops removed from the common 
field, when it was the custom to turn in the cattle, horses and 
sheep, for pasture. This description of it is given in Bronson's 
" History " : 

It was the practice to name the day on which the fields should be "cleared " and 
when the people might turn in their cattle, etc., "commoning day." This was 
late in September or early in October. At the appointed time, early in the morning 
or immediately after sundown, the whole town was astir. All the four-footed 
beasts that lived by grazing were brought out, driven in long procession to the 
meadow gates, and "turned in " to crop the fresh herbage. There they remained, 
luxuriating and gathering fatness, till the late autumnal frosts, The writer's recol- 
lection, extending forty years back (the period referred to is about 1815), furnishes 
him with some refreshing scenes connected with the opening of the common field. 
Boys who used to drive the cows a mile to pasture hailed the time with lively 
feelings. 

One of the occasions of general work and fun which should not 
be overlooked was the "raising." It was enjoyed with all the more 
zest because it came only at rare intervals. In long lines, the 
neighbors who gathered hatidled the immense beams and their 
tackle of heavy ropes, while the small boys stood around ready with 
their baskets of pins. Well built were the houses of those days and 
long did they last, as a survivor, scattered here and there over our 
New England, testifies even to this day. Of course, there were 
refreshments served, consisting principally of doughnuts and cider, 
and the women enjoyed the occasion perhaps as much as the men. 
They often sang at their work, some person being appointed to 
"deacon off" the lines. When it was a church raising, this singing 
was an important part of the services, if such they may be called. 
They tell a story of Pierpont Edwards, the unsanctified relative of 
the saintly Jonathan Edwards, which shows that exuberant spirits 
in those days were not held as completely in check as is now popu- 
larly supposed. A certain country parish in Connecticut started to 
build a new church. The structure got as far as the roofing, when 
the money gave out and the work stopped. What was to have been 
34 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

53° 

a sanctuary stood some years in its bare framework, when finally it 
tumbled down. This was regarded as disgraceful and a new effort 
was put forth to build the meeting-house. Pierpont Edwards was 
appointed to " deacon off " the hymn at the raising. They sang 
with a will the first two lines which he gave them: 

Except the Lord doth build the house 
The workmen toil in vain; 

but they were somewhat startled when he gave them the next 

two lines: Except the Lord doth shingle it, 

'Twill tumble down again. 

Our ancestors— to return to the every-day round of ordinary 
life— were not dependent for their meat on the pork barrel, 
important as it was, or on the salted and "hung" beef. 
Although mutton was rare, there was always plenty of poultry. 
Geese* and turkeys abounded in every barn-yard of any size. The 
o-anders were plucked twice a year. The turkeys, as a rule, were 
fine specimens. The breed was constantly improved by the big 
wild birds. " Spoiling for a fight," they paid frequent visits in the 
spring to the barn-yard fowls. Immense flocks of pigeons f fairly 
darkened the air as they flew over in September and October. 
They fell victims by the thousands to nets, decoy birds and hun- 
dreds of old muskets. There were also not a few vegetables in those 
days to give variety to the diet. These included potatoes, onions, 
squashes, beets and turnips principally. The usual bread was a 
mixture of rye and Indian meal. Wheat bread was scarce and only 
brought out for company or used in the sacrament of the Lord's 
supper. The table of the plain people was generously spread, the 
whole household, including the "help," as a rule sitting down 
together. The menu included often, in addition to what has been 
mentioned, hash served with cresses, mustard and horse-radish, hot 
cakes and maple syrup, apple butter, ;{: honey, doughnuts, pickles, 
ginger cakes, and pies of every kind and variety. In Waterbury, 
that still popular favorite, turkey and cranberry sauce, was evi- 

* Flocks of wild geese, flying south, sometimes dropped an exhausted or wounded bird. This stranger 
would remain contentedly with the barn-yard fowls until spring. In a case known to the writer, the mate of 
the deserting bird left the flock, too, and joined it. The next year, after several flocks had gone northward, 
the pair recognized the cry of their own flock, the last that season. They gave an answering " honk," rose 
into air, and flew away with their companions from whom they had been so long separated. 

+ A traveller by the name of Bennett, writing of New England in 1740, speaks of the immense quantities 
of these wild pigeons. He says: " They are larger and finer than any we can procure in London, and of 
a deliciously wild, gamy flavor. They sell for 18 pence a dozen. " 

4 This was a sauce of apple and quince, put down in the fall to freeze for winter use; or a sauce made 
of sweet apples and boiled cider, preserved in the same way. 



LIFE IN THE " AOE OF HOMESPUN." 



531 



dently a favorite then. In proof of this may be mentioned the 
significant fact that two frolicsome brooks were named Turkey 
and Cranberry brooks, respectively — brooks that never failed to 
remind people of their existence at every flood time. 

A g-reat addition to the comfort of the home was the wood-pile. 
Before the crops were planted in the spring, and after they had 
been harvested in the autumn, several weeks were given up to 
tramps in the forests, to procure the year's supply of wood. This 
was not an insignificant task. In addition to the actual labor, 
thought had to be given to the selection of the different kinds 
needed, to the various supplies wanted, and to the matter of cutting 
the different sizes. First the trees must be "blazed, " that is, those 
to be chosen for firewood had to be marked in advance. Back logs 
for the kitchen fire-place, usually five feet by three, required at 
least two hundred huge hickory or walnut trunks four feet long 
and twenty-four inches in girth. The second logs were much 
smaller and shorter than the back logs. After these came the fore- 
sticks, and hundreds on hundreds of others, fire building in those 
days being an art on which much depended and which required 
just the right assortment of wood. All these varieties, as soon as 
the snow came, were sledded to the wood-yard. The custom of 
turning work into fun and promoting sociability by community of 
labor, of which we have had so many instances in these pages, 
found fresh illustration in the " wood spells, " which lightened the 
toil of these expeditions. These were commonest when the parson- 
age was to be supplied. The spoils of the forest being at last 
safely landed in the back yard, the long, slim, snapping chestnut 
sticks were selected for the brick oven. When they had been 
reduced to coals, the latter were taken out with a long handled 
shovel called a "peel." Then the oven was brushed out free from 
dust and great pans of bread were put in to bake. Even after these 
had been "drawn," there was still sufficient heat to bake the 
numerous pies waiting their turn. After the pies came the pork 
and beans, which were left in the oven all night. By morning they 
were thoroughly cooked and ready for the breakfast table. Baking- 
day was usually Saturday, and perhaps to this fact may be attrib- 
uted the New England habit of making the Sunday breakfast of 
pork and beans. While chestnut was the wood for the brick oven, 
only hickory and oak were used in the fire-places. Other woods 
were too dangerously apt to snap out into the room, and against 
this there was little protection, as fenders were then almost 
unknown. Ash was hardly used at all. It was so full of sap * that 



* Ash sap " boiling '' was regarded as a sovereign cure for ear-ache. 



53: 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



it would put out a small fire. After they were once started for the 
season, fires were built to last all the year round. It was no small 
misfortune if the sparks were smothered after the fire had been 
banked with ashes for a winter's night. This meant that a tin box 
of blazing coals must be borrowed from the nearest neighbor, who 
might live even a mile away. Of course these coals must be 
brought back as quickly as possible, and this in turn meant that the 
person who carried them must go at top speed. Hence arose the 
old saying, "Have you come after fire?" when a neighbor made a 
noticeably short call. As friction matches were unknown at this 
time, the only recourse, if no blazing coals could be borrowed, was 
the flint and steel. To use these required skill. When the flint, 
struck sharply against the steel, threw out a spark or two, the 
manipulator must catch these on some scorched linen or punk, and 
quickly nurse them into a flame. As the flint might be dull or the 
tinder damp and refuse to light, the process was often a tedious 
one, very trying to the temper. Pine wood was iised largely for 
common furniture and coflins. " White wood " provided the lining 
for bureau and table drawers. Curled maple was greatly sought 
after by cabinet makers in the city for elegant bedroom sets. Oak 
was largely used for beams and rafters. Big and dangerous — from 
our point of view — as were the fires of those days, it is curious to 
note that until the day of air-tight stoves few of those old-fashioned 
houses burned down. That so many of them afterward succumbed 
is thus explained: Up against the broad back of the ancient chim- 
ney sparks climbed out in safety. When such a chimney was 
boarded up and a pipe-hole was made for the stove, the pipe rested, 
all unknown, against a coating of mortar. In process of time this, 
dried and fell, and a vast chestnut beam was exposed. A hun- 
dred times probably, when the pipe was red hot, the beam smoul- 
dered a trifle and went out. But the hundred and first time it was 
prime for a conflagration, and the grand old home was gone forever. 
We have touched upon the ordinary routine of life and also upon 
some of the ways in which our ancestors lightened their toil. This 
is the " reverse " of the picture of those days which is so often held 
up to us,'feproducing the sternness which seemed to dominate their 
life. From some points of view it appears impossible to exagger- 
ate the dark colors of the picture. That was a time when the 
expression of emotion and tenderness was, as a rule, suppressed, as 
unworthy of a spirit wiiich was to conquer human nature in its 
devotion to religious duty, and outward nature in its devotion to the 
necessity of an environment of hardship. The watchword of this 
doubly determined life was "discipline," and in the family the rule 



LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF H03IESPUN:' 533 

of this discipline was cast-iron. Lullaby songs were rare. Babies 
of the household were often put to bed in the dark, and left to 
whimper themselves to sleep. Says Nathaniel vSmith, the first 
Chief Justice of Connecticut: 

I never remember that my mother took me upon her knee or kissed me. Birth- 
days were passed by in silence, as though seasons to regret, and no tender gifts or 
mementoes were ever exchanged between parent and child. 

This is the dark side of the picture. It is the side, as has been 
said, which has been so often held up to us that we have forgotten 
that there is another. But that other side certainly existed. Not only 
did our ancestors find amusement in their work, but they also had 
amusements in which they indulged merely for the sake of amuse- 
ment. Says Professor Dexter of Yale, in his monograph, " New 
Haven in 1784," read before the New Haven Historical society 
(from which we have quoted in the preceding chapter): 

I have not time to dwell on details of the social life of a century ago; if it was 
not the hurried and feverish life of the present, no more was it the ascetic and con- 
strained life of a century earlier; there was abundance of gayety of a simple sort; 
and the shopkeeper published prompt advertisements of the arrival of fresh 
invoices of "gentlemen and ladies' dancing gloves for the City Assembly," of 
"chip-hats of the newest taste," of "new figured, fashionable cotton, chintz and 
calicoes, proper for ladies' winter dress," of "elegant figured shauls," of "ladies' 
tiifany balloon hats," and so on ad /;;/?;/////;«,— showing that human nature had the 
same kind of interest then as now. 

As one part of their social life, we must remember this as the time when domes- 
tic slavery was general in New Haven. The importing of slaves was forbidden 
since 1774, but the papers have ocasional, not frequent, advertisements for the sale 
of likely negroes, or it may be a family of negroes, in respect to whom " a good 
title will be given "; sometimes it is for a term of years (perhaps till the attainment 
of legal majority, when by the will of some former owner, freedom was to be 
given), and sometimes it is noted that, in the lack of ready money, rum and sugar 
will be taken in part payment. The relations of masters and slaves were in most 
cases here the best possible; yet sensible men were uneasy under the inconsistency 
of the system, and President Stiles writes in his diary in December, 1783: "The 
constant annual importation of negroes into America and the West Indies is sup- 
posed to have been of late years about 60,000. Is it possible to think of this with- 
out horror ? " 

This gives us a sketch in outline of the reverse of the picture to 
which we have referred. We pass, then, to some of the relaxations 
and amusements during the later years of the eighteenth century 
and the opening years of the nineteenth, in which our ancestors 
indulged distinctly for the sake of being amused. To begin with 
boyhood, every lad could whittle, and whittling was a source of infin- 
ite diversion in grown-up years as well as in boyhood. To the habit 
of whittling we no doubt owe, in large part, the development of that 



534 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

Yankee ingenuity which made him a "Jack-of-all- trades." The typi- 
cal Yankee, as readers of Mrs. Stowe's stories will remember, is 
always represented as busily whittling- when thinking, talk- 
ing or simply idling. Those Yankees had good tools to whittle 
with, fine steel jack-knives of England's best make. In the garret 
on rainy afternoons much of the whittling was done, and it added 
many useful "helps" for the mother. These "helps" included such 
articles as wooden spoons, simple frames, reels for clothes lines, 
and boxes that were wired together and ornamented with an etch- 
ing burnt in on the cover. As Daniel Webster well says: '' The boy's 
knife educated the nation of skilled mechanics and inventors." 
This whittling was, in a way, more or less aesthetic. " The first 
whistle my brother made for me from the gnarled old willow by 
the brook," says the Hon. S. G. Goodrich, "had music in it for me 
such as has never been equalled since." Wrestling was a natural 
result of the superabundant bodily strength characterizing the men 
of those days. Robust by birth, toughened by their out-of-door 
life, as a matter of course they often matched strength with 
strength, and delighted in pitting their local athletic champions 
one against the other. Meeting around a camp-fire, the match was 
opened by the second-rate wrestlers. When one of these had been 
"downed," the defeated champion would call upon another from 
his side to resume the contest. The purpose was, of course, to tire 
out and vanquish the victor. The matches between the Waterbury 
and Westbury boys were famous. It was during one of these 
matches that the Rev. John Trumbull, the Westbury pastor, threw 
a braggart stranger (as related in full elsewhere) into the fire. 
''Coasting" was a natural and favorite winter sport, and the happy 
voices in some more lonely spot made the night musical with 
shouts and laughter. A favorite coasting place in Waterbury was 
the hill along whose ridge Hillside avenue now runs. The momen- 
tum was sufficient to carry the coasters across " Bushell's bay" (the 
frog pond which occupied the site of the present Waterbury Green), 
and land them where the City hall now stands. This reminds us, 
in passing, that this frog pond offered "no end of fun" to the small 
boys in stoning its numerous occupants. Hunting was then as pop- 
ular a sport as it is to-day, and much more generally practiced. 
Every household was possessed of some kind of a musket or 
"queen's arm." Every boy could shoot and shoot to kill. At one 
time many beavers were to be found in Waterbury itself. In the 
neighboring woods squirrels were numerous. In autumn pigeons 
were to be had for the asking, and there were thrushes in the larger 
trees. Bobolinks tempted the hunter from the tops of the tall 



LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN." 535 

weeds, and the doves in the bushes were an easy prey. The red 
foxes were a nobler game; coon hunts were as popular then as now, 
and the woodchuck was the special prey of the small boy. 

Of all the principal occasions of the year, perhaps " training-day" 
should be mentioned first. " Going to muster" was the grand annual 
frolic. Every town which had sixty-four soldiers — only able- 
bodied men were soldiers — and a sufficient number besides for offi- 
cers, formed a foot company. The officers were elected by the men, 
and two drums were allowed to each company. In smaller towns, 
which lacked the required quota, only the sergeants and inferior offi- 
cers were elected by the soldiers. These train-bands were by no 
means merely carpet soldiers. In King Philip's war they were 
called out more than once. In 1675 their efficiency was severely 
tested, and the very existence of the colonies at this crisis depended 
in no small degree on their thorough training. In more recent 
times special volunteer companies, formed by men of tried military 
experience, did on the whole better service than the train-bands, 
and were more generally depended upon. On " training-days " the 
children were as much "in evidence" as their elders. The booths, 
containing generous supplies of gingerbread, were the especial 
delight of the youngsters, and gave them a chance for extravagance 
for which long preparation had been previously made in the hoard- 
ing of stray pennies. This gingerbread was baked in large sheets, 
and the question of how much, broken off from one of these sheets, 
constituted a " penny's worth " was a most important one. Another 
day, dear to the youthful heart, was "Independence day," to use 
the old-fashioned name. Then, as now, it was a day devoted to 
noise. Its culmination was reached when some musty old cannon 
was dragged forth from its hiding-place, loaded to its limit and dis- 
charged to the infinite risk of life to all in the vicinity. Another 
holiday of wide-spread popularity, which has now become simply a 
local institution, was " Commencement day." Edmund Quincy, in 
the " Harvard Book " (already quoted in this chapter), thus describes 
its observance: 

The whole population of Boston seemed to precipitate itself upon Cambridge. 
The road was covered with carriages and vehicles of every description, with horse- 
men and footmen going and returning. The common near the college, then unin- 
closed, was covered with booths in regular streets, which, for days before and after, 
were the scenes of riot and debauchery. The village indeed had the look of a fair 
with its shows and crowds and various devices for extracting money from the 
unwary. 

What is true of the popular recognition of Harvard's Commence- 
ment in Massachusetts applies equally to Yale's Commencement in 
Connecticut. Every town sent its delegation of representatives to 



536 BISTORT OF WATERBURY. 

take part in the festivities at New Haven. Ordinary people used 
Commencement as a date to reckon by, as we use the Fourth of July 
or Christmas. An amusing last century story is told by the Hon. 
F. J. Kingsbury, of a woman living on a farm in this vicinity who 
complained one year that her hops were undersized. "But," ex- 
plained a neighbor, "you picked them too soon. It isn't time to 
pick hops yet." " I always pick my hops on Commencement day," 
she replied. " But," returned the neighbor, " they have changed 
Commencement. It came earlier this year," — something which the 
woman could hardly believe possible, so sacredly immutable was 
the festival. Among other stated occasions which permitted relax- 
ation and social enjoyment, Thanksgiving da}^ comes first in im- 
portance. Originally, of course, it was a purely religious institu- 
tion. But when it came to take the place of Christmas, its original 
character was gradually modified and a large part of the day was 
given up to hilarity and social mirth. Fast day, on the other hand, 
retained its original character for a much longer period. Never- 
theless, there is evidence extant that it was not entirely devoted by 
everybody to prayer and fasting solely. Election day, at first 
appointed for inaugurating the governor in his office, came in time, 
as Professor William C. Fowler of Amherst says (in his " Notes " to 
the Centennial papers prepared some years ago for the Congrega- 
tional Conference in this state), "faintly to resemble Coronation 
day in England." On that day election-cake was to be found on 
every tea-table, and election balls were fashionable in the evening. 

Passing from special days to general forms of amusement, it is 
to be noted that singing schools were a popular diversion with the 
young people. In this vicinity they were often held on Sunday 
evenings. Singing seemed a safe and appropriate outlet for pent-up 
spirits which had been held under the strictest control from sun- 
down of the Saturday evening before. It is said of those who con- 
ducted these singing schools here in Waterbury that they were 
more than usually successful teachers. Corn huskings — at which 
finding a red car carried with it the privilege of a kiss — occasional 
barbecues and clam-bakes in the forest or by the sea-shore, sleigh- 
riding in the winter, when frecpiently from ten to fifty sleighs were 
brought into requisition, kite-flying in the spring and ball-playing 
in the autumn complete the list of the principal minor diversions. 

There were certain institutions of those days which might pos- 
sibly, from one point of view, be classed among the amusements, 
although amusement was not properly their object. The "vendue" 
was one of these, that is to say, the public auction of goods and 
chattels taken out on writs of execution and sold at public sale by 



LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN." 



537 



the sheriff at the whipping-post, where they had been previously 
advertised. It is seldom at any time, or tmder any circumstances, 
that a public auction fails to draw a crowd. In these earlier days, 
in a village as quiet as was Waterbury then, the tap of the drum 
which summoned would-be purchasers and mere on-lookers to the 
scene of the auction must have met with a general response. The 
whipping-post is another institution which certainly filled the place 
of a public amusement, if it did not actually constitute such an 
amusement.* It is a creditable statement to make that only at rare 
intervals was any one found deserving of this debasing punishment. 
But now and then there were cases where culprits were sentenced 
to receive a half-dozen lashes on the bare back. As late as 1805 it 
is recorded that on one occasion the school was " let out" that the 
scholars might witness the whipping, and learn for themselves 
what petty thieving, lying and brawling led to. The last man who 
was publicly whipped in Waterbury was Walter Whelan. The 
whipping-post was abolished by 1820, and by 1830 all reference to 
it disappears from the statute-book. Some may be disposed to won- 
der that public whipping should have lasted here in Connecticut 
into the present century. But when we consider that objections 
against public executions have only recently received anything like 
a general recognition, one perhaps is led to wonder rather that the 
whipping-post was abolished as soon as it was. It is interesting to 
note in this connection that the whip for wife-beaters and other 
brutal criminals has its advocates to-day among some of the most 
advanced pcjenologists, and that in the most successful institution 
of the kind in the world, the Elmira (N. Y.) reformatory, corporal 
punishment is a most effective part of the system, and is recognized 
as such by students of high standing. 

In the category of such semi-amusements as we have been consid- 
ering, it may not b^' unfair to include " going to funerals." When we 
consider how many people in modern life, especially in the smaller 
places, find a strange satisfaction in attending obsequies, it is per- 
haps no marvel that at this older period the custom had so univer- 
sal a vogue as almost to entitle it to be classed as an entertainment. 
The scene at a country funeral can easily be pictured to him- 
self by any one who is at all acquainted with rural New England 
to-day, so persistently does the custom survive. In summer the 
women crowded the house of mourning in decorous silence, while 
the men were gathered about the doorsteps in small groups, and 
some few sat upon the grass at a little distance or leaned against 
the fence. The eulogy of the departed at times occupied an hour 

* See further, Vol. II, p. 62. 



^38 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

in its delivery, and as a matter of course included a detailed per- 
sonal obituary.* 

It must be noted before we leave the amusements of this period 
that it was at the very end of it that the travelling circus first inade 
its appearance. It was of course a circus without a menagerie, but 
included a clown and an exhibition of minstrels. The main part of 
the programme was devoted to feats of strength and agility, and 
the band played as noisily then as now when the performer made 
his bow to the audience after the successful performance of his 
"act." 

In passing next to the more formal life of the people, it may be 
said, perhaps to the surprise of some, that dancing was an amuse- 



Is rc^pecffullfj solicited to attend a Bull at B. 
Ihydciis Ball Rioni on JFcdnesdc'ii, l'\'b. Si/i, 
1^12, ut :! crdaJ:, F. M. 

II. t :/Ox, 7 Mar.a- ^a. smitu, 



ment not tabooed, even by the more strictly religious, until the 
latter part of our period. The balls were usually held in the state 
room of the tavern, at least in the smaller towns, but the larger 
residences often contained ball-rooms. This was true of the resi- 
dence of David Hayden, Esq., which stood on East Main street 
where the church of the Immaculate Conception now stands. We 
give, in fac-simile, an invitation to a ball at Mr. Hayden's residence, 
the original being in the possession of Mrs. S. E. Harrison. 
The dances in which our ancestors indulged were, of course, 
square dances and contra-dances, these last being such as the 



* Funeral reform was not unheard of 130 years ago. The first number of the Connecticut Coiirant, 
dated at Hartford, October 29, 1764, says : " It is now out of fashion to put on mourning at the funeral of 
the nearest relation, which will make a saving to this town of ;^2o,ooo sterling per annum. " 



LIFE IN THE " AOE OF HOMESPUN:' 539 

Viro-inia reel and "money mtisk" — " straight figures," as they were 
called. The change in public opinion in regard to the propriety of 
dancing among religious people of the stricter view dates probably 
from the revival conducted here in Waterbury in 1817-18 by the 
Rev. Asahel Nettleton, the celebrated revivalist. As related in 
another chapter, Dr. Nettleton labored in Waterbury for some 
two years, and he produced a strong impression upon the religious 
views of those who came within the sphere of his influence. It is 
rather curious to note in this connection that Dr. Nettleton himself 
first felt what the old theologians called '• conviction of sin " after 
attending a ball on Thanksgiving night in 1800. This was at North 
Killingworth, when Nettleton was a farmer's lad just about old 
enough to go to balls. His young companions at this time were 
making arrangements to establish a dancing school and naturally 
expected his cooperation. This he would not give them, although 
he refused to tell the reason. When later in life he became a revi- 
valist, his views on the subject of the sacrifice that Christians 
should make were so intense and severe that it is not remarkable 
that they led to a very general abandonment of dancing in those 
parts of New England where he preached. Here is a typical extract 
from one of his sermons: 

For what does the sinner sell the blessings of the Gospel? Not for value 
received, but for mere trifles— one morsel of meat— a momentary gratification — 
for these he parts with the joys of Heaven. It may be for the sake of present ease 
— or for a title of worldly honor — a pufl: of noisy breath— or perhaps for the sake of 
obliging a companion, who is the enemy of God— or for the sake of indulging some 
beloved lust. In the indulgence of these pleasures, the conduct of the sinner may 
be attended by the stings of conscience. It is true no one expects to complete the 
bargain. But many do it. Temptation comes and conviction goes. 

The change of view during this period in regard to dancing is thus 
summarized by Professor Fowler of Durham in his " Notes, " 
already quoted in this chapter: 

Dancing was for a period a frequent amusement among the young people in 
most of the towns in the commonwealth of Connecticut. The people learned good 
manners, first from the district schools, secondly from public worship, thirdly from 
the military, and fourthly from dancing. But in time there grew tip an opposition 
to dancing among certain religious people of the Congregational order. So great 
was the opposition that in some places it led to church censures. In one case, a 
deacon, an excellent man, at the marriage of his son took one or two dancing steps 
in passing through the room where they were dancing, to obtain his hat. For this 
he was brought before the church to make his confession. This he refused to do, 
declaring that he could not see any wrong in what he had done, but was willing to 
say that he was sorry that he had grieved any of the brethren. 

Professor Fowler mentions a number of similar cases. One was 
that of a young lady, highly educated and of excellent character, 



^^o HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

who was also a mernber of the church, and who had attended 
a ball with the approval of her father and mother, they, too, 
beino- church members. One of the deacons of the church 
requested the pastor to commence proceedings of church disci- 
pline, but to his credit be it recorded that he refused to do it. 
Another is the case of a young man who was excommunicated for 
attending a ball which he had been admonished not to attend by 
some of his fellow church members. Professor Fowler adds: 

Dancing masters were employed and dancing schools patronized by the people, 
though some had conscientious scruples concerning the practice. These scruples 
were in some cases, however, ingeniously put at rest. A miss of twelve from the 
countrjr, spending the winter in New Haven, was sent by her friends in that city to 
a dancing school. This fact became known in due time to her neighbors in the 
country, one of whom said to her mother, while in company: " I hear that j^our 
daughter attends dancing school in New Haven." The mother evasively replied: 
" She attends a ' manner school.' " " Oh, is that all ?" rejoined the neighbor; " it is 
a good thing to attend a manner school." 

Professor Fowler also notes that dancing was not uncommon at 
weddings, and that the mirth was often uproarious. He makes this 
quotation from Mrs. Emma Willard's sprightly poem entitled 
"Bride Stealing": 

Next creaked the tuning violin, 
Signal for dancing to begin — 
And goodly fathers thought no sin, 
When priest was by, and at a wedding, 
Peggy and Molly to be treading. 
Nay — priest himself, in cushion dance, 
At marriage feast would often prance. 
The pair of course led up the ball, 
But Isaac liked it not at all. 
Shuffle and cut he would not do, 
Just bent his form the time to show, 
As beaux and ladies all do now; 
And when the first eight-reel was o'er. 
Stood back to wall and danced no more; 
But watched the rest above them rising, 
Now chatting — then thus criticising: 
" When Christian fathers play the fool. 
Fast learn the children at such school; 
Better it were to mind the soul, 
And make the half-way covenant whole; 
And priest, when son like that he sees, 
Were best at home and on his knees." 

In the early part of the period, in remote rural communities 
(a description which fits Waterbury at that time) the dancing was 
characterized by a simplicity that now seems almost incredible- 



LIFE IN THE ''AGE OF HOMESPUN." 541 

Unoccupied houses were often chosen as the scene of the dances, 
and the only refreshment was well water, which had to be drawn 
with an old-fashioned sweep. The girls of that time were not infre- 
quently accustomed to dance in their bona Jideha,ve feet. It is always 
a subject of curious study to note the moral distinctions of any 
given period. At the very time when dancing came under the ban, 
when Sabbath-breaking was thought to be almost as heinous as 
house-breaking, and when card-playing was looked upon as wicked 
in the extreme, taking chances in a lottery was considered a per- 
fectly legitimate form of speculation. During the agitation against 
the established Congregational body, when the Episcopal church was 
so justly indignant at the few privileges granted to it (a subject 
which has been reviewed at length in the preceding chapter), license 
was granted to that body to "run a lottery" to increase the bishop's 
fund. In discussing this subject, in his address as president of the 
American Social Science association (1894), Frederick J. Kingsbury 
says: 

There certainly is what may be called a fashion in morality. I had occasion not 
long since to examine the papers of a law3'er and judge who held a deservedly high 
social position in the community where he lived a hundred j^ears ago. I was some- 
what startled, I might almost say shocked, at finding among them a great number 
of lottery tickets. But when I came to see the purpose to which the proceeds of the 
lotteries were to be applied, and remembered the history of the times, I was 
relieved. A hundred years ago the lottery was the popular form of benevolence. I 
found tickets in lotteries for building churches, endowing colleges and schools, 
building bridges, augmenting a fund for the support of a bishojj — for almost every 
form of worthy and commendable public enterprise. In the same receptacle, side 
by side with the lottery tickets, I found the record of a public prosecution against 
an individual for permitting a game of cards to be played in a private house. And 
I said, " Who are the righteous, and where are the foundations?" Like Mrs. Peter- 
kin, I sat down and thought, but with the same result that attended Sam Lawson's 
cogitations as described in " Oldtown Folks." " Sometimes," said Sam, " I think — 
and then again — I don't know." 

Consideration of the varying moral standards which obtain in 
different communities and at dift'erent times suggests naturally 
the different view of drinking and of drunkenness which then pre- 
vailed. The great temperance reform had its beginning in the ear- 
lier part of the century and belongs to the period of which we are 
writing. The main facts of that early agitation may be found in 
the chapter devoted to philanthropy and reforms. The extent 
of the drinking habit was such that one wonders why the reform 
did not find an earlier beginning. As a matter of course, the 
under cupboard in almost every household was well stocked 
with various kinds of liquors. Cider was the universal table bev- 
erage, and West India rum was in general use. Every laborer had 



HISTORY OF WATERS UBY. 

54-' 

his half-pint per dav, especially in summer weather, and to neglect 
to offer a drink to a friend was a confession of poverty few were 
willino- to make. The ever present demijohn filled with rum stood 
ahvavs at hand for hospitality or for private use, and the morning 
dram was almost as regularly taken— by the men at least— as was 
the breakfast. At installations and at funerals alike the hospitable 
glass was passed frequently and potently. The Rev. Dr. John 
Todd of Pittsfield has testified to the fact that he once actually saw 
toddy mixed on the lid of the coffin. The following description 
of the Rev. Noah Benedict of Woodbury is representative of the 

period: 

On general trainings, the band, with beating of drum and squealing of fife, 
formed in two lines before the parsonage. At this signal, the reverend clergyman 
proceeded to the making of a most bewildering mixture consisting of rum, and 
eggs, and sugar, and boiling water. Two huge handled glass mugs, daintily 
engraved in Old England, now received their fill of the drink of New England. 
The gentleman, in his long silken robe of ceremony, with cocked hat, silk stockings 
and silver shoe-buckles, made ready to go out and greet the band. One last cere- 
mony, one important touch, was given when with a red-hot iron he stirred up rap- 
idly that which now became flip! He bowed to the delighted men, took a swallow 
from each mug, and then passed them around until all had had a taste. Heading 
the procession, he next led them to the tavern, where he presided at dinner. 

A curious text on which the preachers of that day, had they so de- 
sired, might have delivered a sermon on the evils of the social glass, 
is to be found in this extract from the Litchfield Afouitor of May, 1793: 

Died at Waterbury of intoxication, on the eve of the 21st, a smart, active negro 
girl of about nine years old, belonging to Mr. John Nicholls, at the hotise of the 
Rev. Mr. Hart, with whom she lived. Mrs. Hart was abroad, and Mr. Hart, quitting 
the house for a short time, to attend on some labor in a lot adjoining, inadvertentlj^ 
left a bottle of spirits uncorked in a closet to which she had access. On their 
return they found her inebriated to a very considerable degree, though not past 
speaking, and she disgorged, as they supposed, most of the stuff she had swallowed. 
She appeared out of danger and was permitted to sleep, but was soon lifeless. A 
physician could not restore her. This unusual accident is a serious admonition to 
parents and masters of children not to leave this more than common poison within 
their reach. 

vSuch a naive comment as this on so shocking a fatality well illus- 
trates the point of view of that day in regard to the practice of 
drinking. Spirits are actually'called "poison," but the only caution 
suggested in regard to them is not toleavethem where children can 
reach them. The popular drinks of that period, when something 
more elaborate was desired than cider or rum, were " Huxham's 
tincture," tansy bitters, and "Hopkins's elixir." French brandy 
was the luxury of the rich and wine was used for the sacrament 
alone. Every family made gallons of " elixir proprietatis," a dis- 



LIFE IN THE "AGE OF HOMESPUN." 



543 



gusting concoction for the more sensitive stomachs of to-day. The 
cupboard was adorned with beautifully engraved decanters, and 
beside themi stood tall glass mugs, delicately etched, and slender- 
legged drinking cups. Usually, the most elegant piece of furni- 
ture in an ordinary home was this corner cupboard. The upper 
shelf was devoted to teacups and saucers of rare old china, by the 
side of which were the wine glasses, clear as crystal. Beneath were 
the quart and pint glass measures to hold flip and cider, many of 
them richly engraved, sometimes with a coat of arms. A jjiece or 
two of silver and some extra fine pewter filled the remaining space. 
In addition to what seems to us their shocking drinking habits, our 
ancestors made use of various semi-drugs in a manner no less 
shocking to our more aesthetic tastes. These included "camphire," 
"sal volatile," and rhubarb root — this last carried in ever}^ pocket 
and constantly nibbled at, and sometimes scraped off and roasted 
on a "peel" as a remedy for children with digestive ailments; 
also hartshorn and lavender for "the nerves." This list probably 
looks no more peculiar to us than will a list of many of the things 
we commonly use to-day to our remoter descendants. 

The one conspicuous feature in the life of the period was the 
meeting-house. That life centered, in the church to a degree that 
it is now hard to understand. As we have seen, it was the prelim- 
inary settlement which formed a new ecclesiastical society that led 
in the end to the independent town, and it was largely the agita- 
tion over church distinctions which brought about the adoption of 
a new constitution here in Connecticut. Devotion to the church 
found expression in the sacredness attached to Sunday observance, 
which is so marked a characteristic of the period. Custom founded 
on a strong public opinion kept those who might have otherwise 
protested against the exactions of the vSabbath from openly express- 
ing their views or acting upon them. What was called "desecra- 
tion of the Lord's Day " seldom occurred. Bronson's " History " 
gives the curious case of Isaac Bronson, a leading man here in 
Waterbury, who was convicted of doing " servile labor," before 
Timothy Hopkins, justice of the peace. Mr. Bronson's sister had 
been ill at the mother's, four miles out of town. She lived with 
him, and asked him to take her home on a pillion one Sabbath 
evening, which he did, as he declared, "without thought of harm." 
For this he was fined and debarred from the sacrament. He appealed 
the case, but the decision of the justice was sustained. This 
occurred in 1737, but the law which Bronson was convicted of 
breaking was still on the statute book in the earlier part of our 
period. This illustrates the extent to which the observance of the 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 
544 

Sabbath could be legally enforced. A vivid picture of the country 
church of that day is given by A. Bronson Alcott, a native of AVol- 
cott, in his "New Connecticut": 

The meeting-house (Wolcott) was a plain building without a steeple. The pews 
below were old-fashioned box or square pews, numbered on the doors, and the seat- 
ing of the members was according to their age, the elderly nearest the pulpit, the 
aisles leading to it being swept and sanded. The pulpit was very high, and beneath 
it e.xtending in front, were the seats for the deacons. The front galleries extended 
around three sides with raised seats behind and at the south end. Between the 
stairways were high seats for the young people^who preferred them. 

The scene in one of these churches is easy to be recalled: the older 
members of the congregation listening with strictest attention to the 
long prayer and the longer sermon — except where nature was too 
strong to be overcome and the drowsiness of rest after hard toil 
asserted its supremacy— and the " tithing-men " preserving order 
among the more irreverent youngsters. The spirit of fun was not 
wholly to be suppressed even under their system of discipline. 
The story was told even then with relish of how John Trumbull, 
the author of " McFingal," whose father was the pastor at Water- 
town, tied a wig of his father's on the head of the family dog and 
sent the animal to church. The dog stationed himself on the pul- 
pit stairs, out of the preacher's sight, where, however, he convulsed 
the congregation. When at last the preacher discovered the cause of 
the unseemly outbreak he simply shook his head, saying, in an aside: 
"That's some of John's work," and went on with his discourse. But 
an incident of this kind was so startlingly exceptional as to deserve 
quoting simply for that reason. Rarely did anything humorous 
break in to disturb the solemnity of a service in a New England 
meeting-house. The discomforts which were endured by attend- 
ants on worship at that time required a true Spartan spirit. In the 
winter, especially, the cold was intense in the unwarmed meeting- 
house and the worshippers sat through the long services, half be- 
numbed, although their sufferings were somewhat mitigated by the 
general use of foot-stoves. In summer there were touches to the 
scene which have now been almost forgotten, the long turkey- 
feather fans whose constant "swish" added new vigor to drowsi- 
ness, and the little pieces of fennel, dill and caraw^ay, which were 
held in the mouth and called "meetin'-seed." As the hour for ser- 
vice arrived, the pastor entered the pulpit, clambering up a steep 
stairway and shutting himself in with small half-doors, under a 
great sounding-board that looked like a giant extinguisher. The 
congregation remained standing until the preacher reached his 
desk. After his acknowledgment they re-seated themselves, and 



LIFE IN THE "AGE OF HOMESPUNS 



545 



he gathered his silken robe about him, and with dignity took his 
own seat. The singing would seem remarkable to modern ears. 
The hymns were mainly " deaconed off," two lines at a time — only 
a few in the congregation having hymn-books of their own. The 
choir was divided into four parts, being ranged on three sides of 
the gallery. The key-note was given by striking the tuning-fork 
on the choir rail or by a pitch-pipe. There were two services, one 
in the morning and one in the afternoon, with an hour between. 
The ordinary luncheon consisted of doughnuts and cheese and hot 
spiced cider. With this short interval for relief from the strain, 
the average New England household devoted hours in succession 
on Sunday to the cultivation of religious fervor and theological 
lore. 

It was indeed a " land of steady habits " which thus comes to 
view. And the correctness of the familiar characterization is 
emphasized by the account of the state of society toward the close 
of the century, furnished in the following extract from the unpub- 
lished journal of Samuel Miles Hopkins, LL. D. (whose biography 
is given in Volume II, pages 823-825): 

Farewell, Litchfield and Goshen, a country of stoi-m and winter and frightful cold 
and snow, and of hardy, active, reading, thinking, intelligent men, who may prob- 
ably be set forth as the finest commonalty iipon eai'th. 

As an example take a glance at the state of society in Goshen. In that town of 
1200 people there was no such thing as a poor or dependent familj^; no tenant, no 
rich man, except a single merchant. Every farmer tilled his 100 or 200 acres of 
land, chiefly with the labor of his own or his sons' hands. Until I left Connecticut 
I had never seen a person, male or female, of competent age to read and write, who 
could not do both. In different parts of the town were library associations, as is 
common in New England, and that in our neighborhood contained the most popu- 
lar works of history, many of the works of Addison and Pope, and some of Johnson, 
Hume, Blair, Beattie, etc., and they were much read. 

I have attended an election there, and the decorum and order were not less than 
appears in divine service. No such thing as party was perceptible, even if there 
was a feeling of it. The man who should in any way, direct or indirect, by himself 
or his friends, have intimated a desire for office would by that very fact lose it. I 
remember hearing my father say of such a man that he "shook hands rather too 
much " and seemed to be fishing for popularity. If he had not shaken hands so much 
my father might have voted for him. 

These habits produced a wise and stable government and a most perfect obedi- 
ence to the laws The admirable form of the old constitution of Connecticut was 
adapted to bring men forward slowly into public life and to keep them much under 
public view. When long approved, they held their seats very firmly; and the upper 
house (the senate) of that state has at times braced itself against the whole of pub- 
lic opinion and of the popular branch, and defeated an unwise but momentarily 
popular measure. It contained twelve men. My great-uncle, Joseph Hopkins of 
Waterbury, was elected a member of the legislature seventy consecutive times, that 
is, twice a year for upwards of thirty-five years (and my impression is, for thirty-six 
35 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

th'rtv-eieht years). George Wyllis of Hartford, the third of that family who was 
""^cretary of state, was elected to that of=fice by the governor and council a little 
beTore he was twenty-one years of age, on the death of his father. But the election 
of secretary of state belonged to the people except in cases of vacancy ad-interim. 
The people then, by a general vote of the whole state, elected him to the sameofQce 
sixtv (or one or two more than sixty) successive years, and he died in office at upwards 
of eighty. Such were the habits of a people whose government was the most dem- 
ocratic of any on earth, except that of San Marino. 

It is a homely rustic picture whose outlines have been roughly 
sketched in the foregoing pages. It is startling, when one stops to 
think of it, that it is a picture of life only a comparatively few 
short years ago, belonging to the early part of our own century. It 
is not a life that any of us would go back to, and yet, if it had not 
been lived here in New England, in all its God-fearing strictness 
and rigorous simplicity, this America of to-day could not have been 
what it is. There are certain things about it that we cannot recall 
without a sense of loss and a regret that they have ceased to be. 
There are certain picturesque touches which refine it, and in its 
quaintness it appeals to us even aesthetically. As Horace Bushnell 
said, in his discourse at the centennial celebration of Litchfield 
county on August 13 and 14, 1851: 

A hundred years from now, everything that was most distinctive will have 
passed away. The spinning wheels of wool and flax that used to buzz so familiarly 
in the childish ears of some of us will be heard no more forever — seen no more, in 
fact, save in the halls of the antiquarian societies, where the delicate daughters will 
be asking what these strange machines are and how they were made to go. The 
huge hewn timber looms that used to occupy a room by themselves in the farm 
houses will be gone, cut up for firewood, and their heavy thwack, beating up the 
woof, will be heai'd no more by the passer-by — not even the antiquarian halls will 
find room to harbor a specimen. The long strips of linen, bleaching on the grass, 
and tended by a sturdy maiden sprinkling them each hour from her water-can 
under a broiling sun — thus to prepare the Sunday linen for her brothers and her 
own wedding outfit — will have disappeared, save as they return to fill a picture in 
some novel or ballad of the old time. The heavy Sunday coats that grew on sheep 
individually remembered, more comfortably carried in warm weather on the arm, 
and the specially fine striped blue-and-white pantaloons of linen just from the loom, 
will no longer be conspicuous on pi'ocessions of footmen going to meeting, but will 
have given place to showy carriages filled with gentlemen in broadcloth, festooned 
with chains of California gold, and delicate ladies holding perfumed sunshades. 
The churches, too, that used to be simple brown meeting-houses covered with rived 
clapboards of oak, will have come down mostly from the bleak hill tops into the 
close villages and populous towns that crowd the waterfalls and the railroads; and 
the old burial places where the fathers sleep will be left to their lonely altitude- 
token, shall we say, of an age that lived as much nearer to heaven and as much 
less under the world. The change will be complete. 

A little further on Dr. Bushnell draws a picture of some neigh- 
borhood gathering, when a sleigh full of old and young had joined 



LIFE IN THE '-AOE OF HOMESPUN." 



547 



a merry party in some friendly home — -noting- in passing that "if 
those ancestors of ours undertook a formal entertainment of any 
kind it was commonly stiff and quite unsuccessful " — the fire blaz- 
ing high with a new stick for every guest, and no restraint and no 
affectation. Dr. Bushnell continues: 

They tell stories, they laugh, they sing. They are serious and gay by turns. 
The young folks go on with some play, while the fathers and mothers are discussing 
some hard point of theology in the minister's last Sunday's sermon; or perhaps the 
great danger coming to sound morals from the mulLiplication of turnpikes and 
newspapers ! Meantime the good housewife brings out her choice stock of home- 
grown exotics, gathered from three realms, doughnuts from the pantry, hickory nuts 
from the chamber, and the nicest, smoothest apples in the cellar; all which, includ- 
ing, I suppose I must add, the rather unpoetic beverage that gave its acid smack 
to the ancient hospitality, are discussed as freely, with no fear of consequences. 
And then, as the tall clock in the corner of the room ticks on majestically toward 
nine, the conversation takes, it may be, a little more serious turn, and it is sug- 
gested that a very happy evening may fitly be ended with a prayer. Whereupon 
the circle breaks up with a reverent, congratulative look on every face, which is 
itself the truest language of a social nature blest in human fellowship. 

With this picture, so graphically drawn, it is well to close the 
chapter. In it the nobler side of the "age of homespun," as Dr. 
Bushnell felicitously calls it, is drawn with an artist's hand, the 
homely details being- neither exaggerated nor idealized. It is a 
picture all the pleasanter for the eye to rest upon because of the 
ruggedness that frames it in, and the bleakness just outside the 
farmhouse door that forms its backirround. 



CHAPTER XXXVII. 

FIRST HIGHWAY IN CONNECTICUT— COUNTRY ROADS OR KING's HIGHWAYS 

ROADS TO FARMINGTON — TO NEW HAVEN — TO WOODBURY — 

THROUGHOUT THE TOWNSHIP VILLAGE HIGHWAYS RE-SURVEYS 

AND ALTERATIONS — TURNPIKE ROADS — THE PLANK ROAD. 

THE first highway made in Connecticut was from Hartford 
to Windsor. It was to be for cart and horse and was made 
upon the uplands. It was not ordered until April of 1638, or 
more than tw^o years after the settlements began. 

What more conclusive proof than the above do we need of the 
correctness of the statements of the earliest historians and letter 
writers, when they tell us that the so called wilderness of New 
England was, to a considerable extent, an open forest, "kept so, by 
being burned over twice a year by the Indians" as well as by the 
large trees which shaded out the undergrowth. 

To the open forests were added the natural openings along the 
streams, known as meadows. The term "meadows" was not then 
restricted, as now, to grass or mowing lands, but was applied to any 
naturally cultivable land, and the same early writers tell us that 
cattle could find ample pasturage in the woods, and considerable 
hay could be cut in the open places without breaking ground or 
sowing seed.* The Indian's hard and plain paths ran where there 
were objective points of interest, and these the white man naturally 
followed in going from place to place, or in exploring the country — 
the chief trouble being to learn the best route to take to reach a 
desired point without being misled to follow deviations of a local or 
special character, foreign to the object in view. It was from the 
very multiplicity of these trails that the necessity arose for mark- 
ing or blazing the trees when any highway or recognized route was 
sought to be established, and this method, for a time, answered 
very well. 

As land began to be laid out along the travelled path, and cart 
roads became necessary to move crops and goods from place to 

* 1 he elder Winthrop, after having been a short time in Massachusetts, wrote, in 1630: Here is as good 
and as I have seen in England, but none so bad as there. Here is sweet air, fair rivers, plenty of springs, 
and the water better than in England. 

In November of the same year, he wrote : My dear wife : We are here in a paradise. Though we have 
not beef or mutton, yet, God be praised, we want them not— our Indian corn answers for all. Yet we have 
owl and fish in great plenty. 



OLD HIGHWAYS ANB STREETS. 549 

place, the future need of recognized highways dawned — and so to 
preserve space enough to allow of choice of road-bed on convenient 
and satisfactory ground, without the removal of large rocks or 
stumps, and, to exempt it from intrusion by layers out of lands, 
highways were prepared for; — sometimes a number of years in 
advance of their actual use, by placing heaps of stones, called mon- 
uments, at the corners or angles, and at convenient distances 
between, to designate the lines of the highway as against the claims 
of adjoining land-owners. A little later, as the need of future 
highways grew imminent, lands were granted, or divided, subject 
to the same — the expression in the conveyance being: "without 
prejudicing highways." 

In process of time the marks on the trees became obliterated or 
indistinct. The trees themselves disappeared. The heaps of stones 
became displaced or confused with similar heaps, used to denote 
other land boundaries, and the custom was made legal of entering 
upon record a description of the course of the highway, the dis- 
tances and directions between boundaries, with the mention of any 
distinctive objects along the route, or of guiding facts to help in 
recovering lost lines, and fixing in the minds of surveyors salient 
points when laying out adjoining lands. 

At first, only some of the most important highways were 
recorded, a re-survey or new layout being necessary to obtain a 
proper description of them; but at length, by degrees, all highways 
came to be reviewed and placed on record, except a scattered few — 
and these — either because they were too well known to admit of 
question, or because they were unimportant — seem never to have 
been recorded. 

For the above reasons, in following the records of highways we 
are not taken back to the beginning of travelled ways, but are intro- 
duced to them at a comparatively remote and transitional period, 
and become acquainted with them by degrees and installments — 
the laying out of new city streets denotes the intended develop- 
ment of a section, the record of the old time highways development 
accomplished. 

When Waterbury was settled, there was a road from Hartford 
to New Haven, one from Milford to Farmington, and Wallingford 
also had her connections with the outside world. In 1643 each town 
was ordered to choose two surveyors yearly. The surveyors had 
power to call out every team, and person (from sixteen to sixty 
years) fit for labor, one day in each year to mend the highways, and 
were enjoined to have special regard to those "Common wayes " 
which were betwixt town and town. In May of 1679 the roads 



BISTORT OF WATERS URT. 

"from plantation to plantation" were "reputed the Country roads or 
Kin«-'s highways," and it was recommended that the inhabitants of 
the various towns should first clear such roads " at least one rod 
wide." Five years later, in 1684, complaints were made of the 
"wayes between towne and towne" that they "were encum- 
bered with dirty slowes, bushes, trees and stones," and the Court 
ordered that forthwith the highways should be well amended from 
their defects, and so kept. The surveyors in each town were 
enjoined to do their duty, and the wSurveyor's oath was promulgated 
as an inducement to action. 

In preparing a village site for Waterbury in 1677, it seems to have 
been the duty of the Colonial committee to lay out the village high- 
ways, and also to indicate what should be the official highway con- 
necting the new town with Farmington, and thus with Hartford. 
Accordingly, we find that the authorized highway of 1677, which 
was perpetually sequestered by act of the "Grand Committee " in 
1679; which was further reserved and encroachments upon forbid- 
den by the proprietors in 1722; which was re-surveyed and formally 
entered on record in 1754 was substantially East Main street, the old 
Cheshire road to East Farms school-house, thence up the hill in the 
lirie of the present road until past the Austin Pierpont place, when 
it turned northeastward across the present pasture lot where the 
old road-bed may still be seen, and came into the Meriden road a 
little westward of the old Farmington corner — now a corner of 
Wolcott and Waterbury. From there the road ran eastward on the 
south line of Farmington nearly where the Meriden road now is, 
until the brow of the mountain was reached, when it went down 
by the present peach orchards of Barns & Piatt into the Quinnipiac 
valley, and there joined the early road between Milford and Farm- 
ington. Grants of land at East Farms and on the way thither in 
1686 and later; layouts of land near the Meriden road in the 
extreme eastern part of the township in 1722; conveyances of land 
on the route scattered along through many decades, confirm beyond 
question the location of this road as " the road to Farmington.* 

For the line of the Indian highway, see page 220. Besides this 
King's highway to Farmington, there wei'e two recognized roads 
leading to the same town. Just before Mattatuck was settled, the 
southerly and westerly portions of Farmington township were laid 
out in "long lots," many of which were owned by our planters. 
Between these long lots, highways and cross-highways were plotted. 



inson were 



About three miles from the centre on this road, in 1749, Joseph Beach and Cornelius Johr-_... 

granted liberty to advance three rods into the highway, for thirty rods. Two years later the town conferred 
the land upon them, they having built their houses there. 



OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS. 551 

if not laid out, and these probably served as avenues through which 
some of these wandering paths reached Farmington. 

The second recognized road to Farmington (see page 218), re- 
ferred to as "the new road as we go to Farmington" in 1686, is 
found by record passing between the Hog Field hill south of 
Woodtick, and Woodtick. It probably connected with and entered 
Waterbury by the way of the very early path over Long hill from 
Bronson's meadow. On its eastward way, it probably joined one of 
the Farmington highways that were plotted through her long lots 
before Waterbury was — that is, after the road left the bounds of 
our township. 

An early Waterbury path, mentioned in 1696 on the Farmington 
records as in Poland, ran through Bristol, and doubtless is the foun- 
dation for the tradition, faithfully adhered to by luany persons, that 
the first road froin Farmington came over Fall mountain. Spindle 
hill, along the west side of Ash swamp, west of Chestnut hill, along 
the western side of Long hill to Walnut street and so on down to 
East Main street. The " Chestnut hill path " is mentioned in 1686. 

In 1724 we again find mention of another " new road to Farming- 
ton." At vSpindle hill this road left the hill, apparently near the 
school-house, turned northeastwardly to Mad river and then east- 
ward to the line of Farmington, and there it is reasonably certain, 
if not established, that it met the Alcox road of present Wolcott. It 
passed through Wolcott north of the centre, across roads now known 
as Plumb and East streets, and down the mountain into Southing- 
ton valley. These roads of 1686 and 1724, as mentioned, were prob- 
ably but new sections of road connecting former highways or trails 
on the Waterbury side with those on the Farmington side. 

Before 1720 we have few recorded highways. It must not, how- 
ever, be taken for granted that the highways about the town, and 
even the more distant ones were not formally laid out at a much 
earlier period than we find them on record. Many of them make 
their first appearance as re-surveys. Many are recorded as laid out 
at a certain time, when we know that the highway in question had 
been in use for a number of years. 

As an instance of the delay to make record, is the statement of 
Benjamin Barnes and Stephen Upson in 1720 — that they had been 
appointed with " Leftenante Judd " to lay out highways to the mill. 
They then state what they had done at least eighteen years before 
that time — for Lieut. Judd died in 1702. 

The earliest date of a highway accompanied by a layout that is 
on record is Grand street, from Bank street to Union scpiare, and 
that was the date of the re-opening of the street, at which time we 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

assume that it was much narrower than in Samuel vSteel's original 
layout of the village plot. In 17 12 it was 3 rods wide at Bank street 
and 5 rods at Union square. 

In 1716 Sergt. Stephen Upson and Abraham Andrews laid out 
"the Country road to the corner of New Haven bounds." They 
began "at the mouth of the mill trench" on the east side of Mad 
river (they call it Mill river). It ran to Horse Pasture bridge, to 
Smug Swamp brook (where the path then went over) to Thomas 
Hickcox's land, to a rock on the east side of the Country road, to a cart 
way newly made over a stony swamp, to a black oak stadle on the 
west side of the Country road on the hill against vSergt. Upson's land, 
through Daniel Warner's 8 acre lot, to the Fulling Mill brook, to 
Doctor Porter's land, under the hill to the Great Hollow (between 
the Hill Side cemetery and that of the Roman Catholics), up the 
hollow to a plain that leads toward the Burying Yard (Pine Hill), 
eastward to Samuel Hikcox's plowing land, to the west side of 
Hikcox's house, over the plain to the brook that runs to the river, 
imdcr a hill and over a brook, to Thomas Richards's house, to 
Obadiah Scott's house (beyond which it turned eastward), to the 
cart way that Judd's Meadow folks use eastward toward New 
Haven, "and so to the end of the bounds as we suppose." This 
road was 4 rods wide its entire length. 

The repeated reference in the above to the former Country road 
to New Haven evidently refers to the first one laid out, or ordered, 
in 1686. 

The next year, Dec. 15th, a highway was laid out "The west 
side The River," down to Joseph Lewis's house lot. It will be 
remembered that passages or ways twenty feet wide were very 
early laid out through the Common Field meadows, and this highway 
began on one of those passages at the Long meadow bars and ran 
across a corner of Doctor Porter's plain which lay west of Pine 
Island, turned west under the hill to the west side of Carrington's 
8 acre lot, then a west line up the hill to the north end of Samuel 
Barnes's land, then southwest the west side of Bronson's 8 acre lot, 
over a little brook, then "whealing" southward down to and west 
through John Barnes's land, to Hop brook, down the brook, across a 
part of Abraham Andrews's Judd's meadow lot, over the brook, 
west to the Great hill (Gunn hill, a portion of which is now known 
as the Terraces), southwest of John Barnes's farm, southwest past 
a corner of a lot of Benjamin Richards (deceased), southwest down 
to Butler's brook, down the brook on the north side to Samuel 
Warner's land, and over the brook to Joseph Lewis's 25 acre house 
lot. His house was a little west of Ward street. 



OLD uighwat;^ and streets. 553 

The next day, and it was December weather, two of the survey- 
ors, Thomas Hikcox and John Bronson, laid out a 4 rod highway to 
Thomas Andrewb's land at Turkey Hill. This was, in part, the same 
Prospect road that now passes in sight of the Turkey Hill reser- 
voir. It is described as beginning at East Main street (they call it 
the Country road), and at "the highway that lies between Daniel 
Porter's land and Jeremiah Peck's land " (believed to be originally 
Ne well's Cart way), or the way that once answered to present Dub- 
lin ' street, although running at a different angle. This road ran 
south over the Mad river, up along the south side the river to the 
east end of William Hikcox's land against Gaylord's plain. The 
original plain is where Rogers & Brother's mill is. The upper 
Gaylord's plain is where Silver street begins. 

The road then ran east over the river, by the river to the end of 
the plain, then crossed the river and ran southwardly to the north 
side of Samuel Hikcox's field (a part of it was probably in St. 
Joseph's Cemetery), thence east, and eastwardly up the East moun- 
tain w/iere the road lunv is, across one corner of Samuel Porter's farm, 
south by the east side of it, and along the west end of Thomas 
Andrews's land. 

The same day they laid out a 4 rod highway from the New 
Haven road across the south end of the " xVbrigado " to the above 
East Mountain road. 

Without date, two roads are recorded, one from Buck's Hill to 
the vicinity of Wheaton's station, or the ancient " Hancox Brook 
meadows" above Greystone; the other, from Buck's Hill to Wel- 
ton's ice pond. 

THE EARLY WOODBURY ROADS. 

There were three early roads to Woodbury. The first one is 
mentioned in 1687 and at that date ran over Break Neck hill. A 
lower road is mentioned in 17 18 and earlier. An upper road is found 
about the same time. It is not until 1720 that a lay-out of the road 
of 16S7 appears upon record. At that time, it comes duly labelled 
as: "A road towards Woodbury so far as our bounds went." 
Isaac Bronson, Timothy Standly and Thomas Judd laid it out. 
They began on West Side hill, where Highland avenue is. They 
called the place "our west bars." The bars were in the common fence. 
The first course of the road ran to the west side of the old Bunker 
Hill road and was twenty rods wide to that point. From thence 
the road was to be ten rods wide. It took the course of the pres- 
ent Middlebury road to the Park road, up the Park road to the foot 
of the first hill (Richards, so named from the first Obadiah Rich- 
ards's 2 acre lot), where it entered the "lower way." It then turned 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

southward and ran along the east side of the hill crossing its south- 
ern point, and came out into the present road opposite the Oronoke 
road which it followed to Oronoke hill, where it diverged from the 
lower way and ran over the northern extremity of the Oronoke 
rano-c. The old road is still used, and there is a house on it which 
was long occupied by the Umberfields. It unites with the present 
Middlebury road near Pine rock — a well known point in the Water- 
bury and Middlebury line. It followed the pi'esent road by the 
south end of Mount Fair, then went northwestward down its west 
side in the course of the present road to the ancient Richardson 
place at Bronson's meadow, where Ebenezer Bronson lived in 1729, 
and Ebenezer Richardson in 1750, and his son Nathaniel kept 
tavern in Revolutionary days.* 

From the Richardson house the road ran to the west side of the 
big meadow anciently called Race plain, over the top of Three Mile 
hill, past Prime's land, about Isaac Bronson's farm (where it was 
already 6 rods wide), then "to run whereabouts the path now runs " 
10 rods wide through Isaac Bronson's land and to the end of the 
bounds. It met the road from Woodbury at the Woodbury line, " at 
the going down of Wolf Pit hill to the Brids brook in Woodbury 
bounds." This is called "the Country road to Woodbury" in 1735. 

The " upper road to Woodbury " connected with the meadow pas- 
sage of 20 feet which began near present INIattatuck street, ran 
ahuig the cast side of Manlian meadow to Brown's bridge over the 
Manhan canal, across a corner of the meadow, to and across the river, 
through Steel's meadow to Steel's plain, and up the plain to the point 
where the early roads to Watertown and to Plymouth began. 

The upper Woodbury road left this meadow passage a little 
below the Almshouse, followed the course of Jedediah's brook to 
Isaac's meadow bars, not far from where the Bunker Hill road joins 
a cross road from Watertown. It followed substantially the pres- 
ent Bunker Hill road, and Poverty street to the Woodbury line. 

The " lower road to Woodbury " we find nowhere laid out as a con- 
tmuous road. It was in use in 17 15, if not earlier. It diverged from 
the road of 1720 at Oronoke hill, went by the present clay hole, 
through Hop Swamp, over Bedlam hill and through Bedlam.' 

THK day's work of OR. EPHRAIM WARNER AND JOHN ISRONSON. 

April 5, 1724, the highways of the northeastern section received 
attention. One was laid out to Buck's Hill. It began at the clay 



ere, tradition tells us. that General Washington dined on one occasion, his horse, meanwhile, being 
thlrn 'l'° ^" enormous elm tree, lately standing, in front of the inn. And here is repeated the same storv 
-.c ,^'^^aT^, ^'^^^ "' concerning General Washington and Esquire Hopkins, with Nathaniel Richardson 
as the decidedly inquisitive " questioner. 



OLD IILGHWAYS AND STREETS. 



555 



pits (vicinity of Grove and Bishop streets) and continued to about 
Division street (Edmund Scott's pasture) 6 rods wide, was then 
increased to 20 rods, which width continued as far as Mrs. Pear- 
sail's house (the layout says, Obadiah Scott's house). From there, 
it continued hi the path by the east end of Buck's Hill, unto Richard 
Welton's house. From Welton's house it ran northward "/;/ a path 
to Handcox Brook meadow at Warner's and Welton's land." 

The same day, they marked a road or highway from Obadiah 
Scott's house lot on the East side of Wigwam Swamp brook to the 
Pine Hole bars, 4 rods wide (Buck's Hill road to Waterville). 

On the saine day, they began at the east end of Buck's Hill and 
ran east, northeast, to a great white oak tree that stood at the south 
end of Benjamin Warner's house lot, and east and north to Ash 
Swamp brook. It then ran to the " New Road to Farmington " 
until they got over the Mad river to Farmington bounds, which 
point was then marked by "a tree with two branches, and a stone 
in the crotch." 

The same day, these industrious men laid out a highway from 
" Sergt. Welton's Israel's field," that ran south, down Barnes's plain, 
" and so to run south and by west through the Chestnut Hill Rocks, 
and through Mantoe's House Rocks, and then on the west side of 
Lewis's meadow to the north end of Edmund's pasture." 

In 1727 the already existing highways leading to and about 
present Watertown were formally laid out by two John Bronsons 
and Thomas Hickcox. One of these began on Steel's brook a little 
above Isaac Castle's house (southward of Joseph Baird's house), 
between the brook and the path. It was 8 rods wide to vSpruce 
brook (above Oakville station). From John Warner's line (the Oak- 
ville Pin company's dam is about the north end of his line) it was 
to hold so wide to Jeremiah's brook and to vSteel's brook. It was 
"to run up against Ebenezer Richardson's house" (the James 
Brown, John Merrill, Esquire Buckingham and Davis house). From 
that place it was 6 rods wide to Samuel Thommus's corner (near the 
late Cande place), then 4 rods wide for 15 rods, then 8 rods to Cran- 
berry brook, from thence 4 rods to the village line — just on the 
western side of Watertown village. 

The same day, they laid out a road from the Richardson house 
above, to Jonathan Scott's mill. 

In 1729a road was laid out from the Farmington road to Timothy 
Hopkins's Hog-field. Beginning at the old satv-mill path (where the old 
Cheshire and the Meriden roads diverge), it continued in the path 
that goes to said Hopkins s to a little this side of Spruce Swamp, west 
side of the swamp to Jeremy's brook that comes out of Upson's 



6 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

meadow, and continued the highway in that path to said Hopkins's 
barn,* 12 rods wide all the way. This old path, here laid out, was 
probably the old second road to Farmington. 

From Hopkins's barn it took its way over the brook, and up the 
hill, and "along by the path that now is, to the Samuel Hikcox land 
and north of it over the Mad river, and then came to the said path 
and then kept the path almost all the way to the Hogfield and then go 
eastwardly to said (Hopkins's) hog-field.'' From Hopkins's barn f the 
road was but 6 rods to the top of the hill beyond it. From that 
point 12 rods. May 29, 1729, a highway was laid out over Burnt 
hill to Buck's Hill path. It was in an old path. It ran up Cook 
street to Pine street, out Pine street to Burnt hill, up Burnt hill and 
on in the old cart path to the north end of the hill and down east- 
ward to Buck's Hill path. 

In 1729 three highways were laid out at Judd's meadow, one of 
them through Oak and Maple streets to the river, down the river 
on the east side to Ward's island, across the island to the west side 
the river, down the river to the Straits mountain or near it, across 
the river to the mouth of Beacon Hill brook. Another one left the 
New Haven road near the bend below the Great hill (a portion of 
Mulberry hill) and went winding down into the valley at Grove 
cemetery, and on down the river side to Beacon Hill brook. In the 
same year, near Thanksgiving time, Stephen Hopkins and Joseph 
Lewis laid out the road that still is known as the Hopkins road. It 
began at the south side of the Fulling Mill brook and ran to the 
New Haven road west of vStraitsville. 

The first Hopkins road connected vStephen Hopkins's original 
home-farm on his hill with James Baldwin's grist mill at the old 
Fulling Mill site on Fulling Mill brook to the northward, and, with 
the New Haven road at Thomas Richards's house in the other direc- 
tion. The road was in the form of an ox-bow, with the lane lead- 
ing to the Hopkins house through the lots at the apex. The lane 
crossed the valley of the brook on which we think Stephen's saw- 
mill stood in 1734, and went up the hill eastward to his house. The 
second one (that ran to Straitsville) was known as the New Haven 
road, being adopted as a route from Waterbury to that city, by way 



* The Elijah Frisbic house, now gone, occupied the site, and was, with little doubt, built by Timothy 
Hcpkins before 1718, at which date his house, at this locality, is mentioned. It may have been merely his 
farm house, and he, with his family, may have been living in the one half of his father's house in town at 
the lime his illustrious son Samuel was born— but the mention of this house in 1718 makes the place of 
Samuel's birth (in 1720) uncertain. The wise men of Waterburv in the eiifhteenth century, came, notably, 
from the East. 

T In 1739 we find this one referred to as "the highway that goes from Capt. Hopkins's Farm house to 



town." 



OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS. 557 

of Pearl lakes (called in the layovit of it " Spectacle ponds ") and 
the Potter cemetery, and many persons thought this was the orig- 
inal route. 

The road "from Woodbury road towards Litchfield," began 
almost at the point where the middle road to Woodbury began in 
1720. It was laid out in 1729. It ran from West Side hill to the 
rear of Westwood, to Richards's house on the Bunker Hill road, 
along by the west fence of the Common field to the gate at the 
upper end of Ben's meadow, then to James Williams's house, then to 
George Welton's house on the hill between Steel's brook and Tur- 
key brook near lower Oakville, then up over Patteroon hill and 
Hickcox mountain, lengthwise of both, and on over Scott's moun- 
tain to the northwestward, and at last reached Obadiah's brook 
north of Watertown centre. 

In 1729 and in 1730 the particular and private highways through 
the northern meadows beginning at Steel's meadow and extending 
to Buck's Meadow field were laid out, also other meadow passages. 
Some of these were pent roads, " the proprietors of the Common 
field having liberty to keep up their fence, maintaining a Gate or 
Bars." 

The upper road to Woodbury was laid out in 1730 by William 
Judd and James Porter. It is the first highway that we have where 
the length of the courses is given. It began at Isaac's meadow bars 
and ran one mile and 56 rods to Joseph Nichols's corner, but, after 
running five courses (215 rods) beyond the corner, the surveyors 
gave it up and continued to Woodbury bounds in the old and easy 
way. 

In 1732 a highway ran along about where South Main street runs 
below the Mad River bridge to City Corners. It is described as 
"going through Mad meadow." 

As early as 1735 began the exchange of highways. Perhaps 
the first one was that through Manhan, vSteel's and the Hancox 
meadows. 

The same year, a highway a third of a mile long was laid out at 
"John Allcox across his land," and another highway northward 
from this, " beginning a little east of Allcox barn and running north 
80 rods." 

" For the inore convenient passing and re-passing of the people 
that live upon Waterbury River north and others," a highway was 
laid out from the spring at Buck's Meadow mountain. This road 
ran in a general direction southward and was intended to relieve 
the general discontent of the northern people at having such a hard 
road to travel to reach the meeting-house on Waterbury Green. It 



^ HISTORY OF WATERBUBT. 

ran throuo-h the notch of Buck's Meadow mountain, through the 
Capt. William Hikcox and the Samuel Hikcox farms (about a rod 
west of Samuel's house), to Joseph Bronson's land, where it came 
upon the bank of the river, down to Hikcox island, and south to 
the upper end of vSteel's meadow into the highway which was the 
universal passage up the meadows. 

Henry Cook and others at the northward as early as 1731 had 
petitioned for and obtained a highway " from the (northern) extent 
of the bounds to Henry Cook's farm, and from thence to the high- 
wav that goes by George Welton's house." This road began at " the 
head of the bounds," ran down along on the west side of the river, 
but not bounding on it except in two 60 rod runs— the first where 
it began, and the second near it. It crossed the West Branch and 
came down across Scott's Mountain where it touched Scovill's 
northwest corner and ran 104 rods to his southwest corner. Below, 
it joined the highway that John Bronson and John Scovill had laid 
out two years before, beginning on West Side hill at the Woodbury 
road and running "towards Litchfield." Thus we have the Litch- 
field road of 1729 finished in 1731 by this union on Scott's Moun- 
tain. The people managed to get along \vith it for seven years, 
and then William Judd and George Welton, who had been appointed 
"to lay out highways in the northwest quarter of the bounds and 
alter others if need be," changed its course along vScovill's land on 
the mountain and reduced its width from fourteen to four feet at 
that place. The distance from the head of the bounds to the point 
of union was about six miles. 

In 1737 a highway began at the northwest corner of the bounds 
and followed the Woodbury line down, and then ran southwest 
from village lot in one tier to village lot in the next tier, until it 
reached Watertown. This was laid out as a Country road to Litch- 
field. It cannot be found in its former haunts to-day, so many have 
been the changes. 

From this point onward the highways become too numerous for 
mention even. The era for agricultural development was come, 
and Waterbury lands at the village, and elsewhere, were in active 
demand. The history of highways now became, in a measure, the 
history of the town. From and including 1730 to 1741 more than 
fifty highways were laid out. One began at Capt. Hopkins' Round 
Hill lot, ran up that hill and across the Long hill to the highway 
on the Saw Mill plain; and another one ran from the highway over 
Long and Chestnut hills to Mantoe's rocks. It began at the bottom 
of the Long hill, ran northward and northeastward up the hill to 
the upper end of John Bronson's Chestnut Hill land (about a mile 



OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS. ^s,g 

and three-quarters), when it turned northwestward 72 rods into the 
same highway from which it started. 

The highways or streets in and about the city have been intro- 
duced in the narrative history to such an extent that their re-men- 
tion here is, perhaps, unnecessary, but it may be well to repeat 
that in the original village plot present Linden and Bank streets 
were one street, although not precisely in their present lines. 
Ancient Cook street came winding down the hill and probably 
joined chis highway at Grove street; it was anticipated and provis- 
ion made for it, which appears in the record of a grant of 1686, 
which grant was of land near the head of Little brook (which rises 
on Drum hill). In 1687, or about that date, the highway is recog- 
nized as in existence. About 1708 Cook street, from Grove down 
to North Main, was substituted for the original Linden street route. 
In 1708 North Main street which is the final result of this ancient 
highway was turned farther eastward. 

In 1729 there was a formal layout of Cook street from Grove to 
Pine, and from Pine eastwardly and on over Burnt hill, which lay- 
out has been given elsewhere. Four years later, in 1733, Cook street 
was formally laid out from Pine northwardly. In 1737 Pine street 
was laid out from Willow street to Cook street. It had been in 
existence as abundantly proved by grants and lay-outs of land 
from 1687 on down to 1737, at which last date it joined Cook street 
about a quarter of a mile above its present junction. The change 
to the new union took place about 1812. Bank street to Grand was 
in the original plan. During its history it has been known as the 
''Road to Beaver meadows," the "Road to Thomas Porters," and, in 
a few instances as "the Road to Judds meadows," for the reason 
that somewhere above present Meadow street the road divided, one 
branch turning eastward, crossing Great brook, going down about 
in the direction of South Main street, only farther to the westward. 
Somewhere about present Liberty street, it met with a highway 
that started on Mill plain near Union square. This highway ran 
southwesterly to the point of meeting, and the two proceeded 
together as a "Road to Judds Meadow," and went on through Mad 
meadow. 

The other branch of Bank street (still remembered as a low, 
sandy way from Meadow street to the river, and over which the 
alder, pussy willow and hazel-nut bushes presided, nodding their 
consent to the passage of an ordinary vehicle, but covering their 
garments with fringes of hay as often as the venturesome owner of 
a load dared to risk his tons down the overgrown passage) went on 
in about its present course, passing close to the eastern terminus of 



IITSTORY OF WATEEBURY. 
560 

the now absent Hop Meadow hill, crossed the river, threaded the 
sand hills as best it could vmtil it came to Meadow lane near the 
school-house, through which it wandered and wound to Town Plot 
hei>'ht. Bank street on-the-hill was not laid out until 1780. The 
very earliest way up Town Plot was, it is thought, up the border of 
Sled Hall brook. 

The present road from Town Plot to Piatt's mills, or its repre- 
sentative, was laid out in 1740, and is described as beginning "4 
rods west of James Hull's corner at the south end of the old Town 
Plot lot " and running south generally to the " southeast corner of 
Silas Johnson's house lot," where it met the west-side Judd's 
Meadow road. In 1740, a short highway was made in Northbury, 
which began: "Att A highway that Goes Northward and South- 
ward by the house they meet in A vSaboth dayes and we Run East- 
ward About fourty three Rods to the River." The above highway 
beo-an ''between the sd meeting house and John How's then dwel- 
ling." 

The earliest Town-Line road noticed was made about the time 
that the duties of the perambulator became burdensome. It began 
•'at the lower corner of our bounds joining to Wallingford bounds" 
and ran the length of the township at that side, and up to the 
Farmington road. It met this road by Shelton Hitchcock's house. 
A stone still marks the place of meeting. In its 2 rod course it 
passed through lands of Mr. Turney, Gideon Hotchkiss,* " Hickcox 
land," Mr. Southmayd's, Mr. Hall's, and common lands. 

The road from Watertown to Middlebury, as originally laid out, 
was surveyed in 1741. It began at the Woodbury road at Break 
Neck hill, ran a little west of Josiah Bronson's house, through Isaac 
Bronson's farm, to the northwest corner of " Prince's alias John- 
son's farm," to the southeast corner of and through Stephen Up- 
son's, Capt. Judd's, Thomas Upson's and Tuttle's farms, through 



* The following letter, writtea by Gideon Hotchkiss, when in service in the French and Indian war, to 
his son Jesse, also in service at " No. 4," has just been found, and will be of interest: 

Saratoga, Aujrust 16, 1757. 
-•Vfter my tender regards to you, hoping that these lines may find you in good health as I am at present 
and so was your mother and brothers and sisters, and all your and our friends when I came from home. Vou 
will hear the melancholy news of our upper fort. I understand you was well the last I heard from you. I 
am glad to hear from you and of the welfare of all our friends. Give ray love to Lieut. Beebe and to Cor. Weed, 
and tell Cor. Weed that I would not have him send any letter to me but what he is willing every one should 
see, for they break almost all open that comes. You will hear the reason of our being here. I have not time 
to write for the men are now agoing and so I must conclude with a word of advice to you beseeching of you 
to seek to him that is able to deliver you and to sanctify and cleanse you from all sin. O my son I beg of God 
to fit you for a dying hour, this is the only time, now while you are in health. 

Gideon Hotchkiss. 

Jesse, the then young soldier of ig years, lived to return frum that war, but lost his life in the later war, 
dying, " with the army," September 29, 1776. 



OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS. 561 

Stephen Upson's 30 acre farm to the notch of Jeremiah's hill (where 
a road is to-day). Beyond the notch it was laid out through 
lands of Stephen Scott and Richard " Saymour " before it joined 
the Litchfield road just west of Watertown village. In the same 
year there was a lower road from Westbury to Woodbury. 

The Westbury meeting-house is mentioned in connection with 
a highway in 1742, and the "Parish Meeting-House " at Northbury 
in 1743. 

In 1744, among the highways laid out, was the one at Thomas - 
ton, from the river to the last monument at Farmington bounds. 
This road was 8 rods wide where it ran through common land. 
A road was run up from vShelton's orchard on Buck's Hill to meet 
this Thomaston road to Farmington; one was laid out from Walling- 
ford bounds to "a place called Hog Pound brook" on the Farm- 
ington road, and one on Twelve-^Iile Hill. 

In 1745, there was one from Edmund Tompkins's saw-mill to the 
road at the West Side bars; from the north end of Jeremiah's hill, 
to Woodbury bounds; from the country road to Litchfield, to Wood- 
bury bounds; from Break Neck, to a highway between the houses 
of Gunn and John Weed. A number of highways in the south- 
west quarter were also laid out. 

In 1745, Stejjhen Kelsey was living on the old New Haven road 
on the farm lands lately owned by Charles Lounsbury, and a road 
(now perhaps represented by Lounsbury or Glen street) was laid 
out, described as " from the south end of Mad meadow to the hio-h- 
way that goes by Stephen Kelsey 's house." 

In 1746 the village highways and cross highways were laid 
out. In Northbury parish, 1747-1748 were the harvest years for 
highways. They grew in a day and "sprang into being on all 
sides. 

In 1748 the line between Waterbury and Farmington was ad- 
justed on the 15th of April, and on the 25th, wSamuel Hickcox 
Thomas Porter and Daniel vSouthmayd met three men of Farmino-. 
ton at the southwest corner of that town (south of our Farmino-ton 
road) and amicably perambulated north on the line to the Eio-ht- 
mile white-oak tree, and " with good agreement renewed each 
monument." The above point had been a disturbing one to the 
proprietors for some twelve years — the controversy having been 
between them and the proprietors of the Hartford and Windsor 
west lands. 

During the summer of 1748, and for the entire year of 1749, not 
a highway was laid out or altered; probably owing to the " o-reat 
sickness " of those years. 
36 



56: 



EISrORT OF WATERS URT. 



In 1750, Mr. Southmayd records that a highway was for- 
merly laid out to Meshadock and not finished (perhaps inter- 
rupted by the death of a member of the committee), and he 
then records the unfinished portion of it, and ten more high- 
ways Of the number, was one from Ebenezer Richardson's house 
on the Woodbury road to the road from Hop vSwamp to town; a 
new one to Derby bounds; one from the highway a little north 
of Elialcim Wclton's house toFarmington bounds (about two miles); 
also one of 100 rods in length and 4 rods wide, described as 
"from the highway that lyeth upon the old Town Plot tip to vSled 
Hall brook, beginning on the north side of the brook and running- 
northward between Nichols's and Southmayd's and Bronson's land 
to the twenty rod highway." 

One may be pardoned for leaving highways for a moment to say that this land 
of Southmayd's was sold in 1773 by John Southmayd, his grandson, of East Had- 

dam , to William 
\^l|j|lr|^^ Adams, who un- 
doubtedly built the 
house here pictured 
at some time be- 
tween i773andi7Si, 
for William deeded 
it to his son John in 
1781 (15 acres with 
a house on it), and 
no house was men- 
tioned w he n he 
bought the twenty- 
six acres. Adams 
owned four of the 
Town Plot lots and 
all the way to the brook. John bought out the other heirs and in one of his pur- 
chases from them mention is made of the old saw-mill dam, on Sled Hall brook — 
possibly of 1674, certainly of a later day, for the Adams family owned rights in a 
saw-mill there a century later. Early in the present centirry John Adams sold his 
60 acre farm, with house, barn and cider-mill, to Edward and Levi G. Porter. In 
iSii they sold it to Eh Terry of Plymouth. In 1S13 EU Terry sold it to Samuel 
Chipman, and the proposed clock factory became a bark mill. The house built by 
William Adams is standing in 1S95. 

In and after 1750 the records are burdened with numerous alter- 
ations and changes made to accommodate individuals. As an 
instance, Mr. Southmayd desired Cook street, on the west side of 
his Little Brook pasture, to be altered, and it was done to suit his 
wishes. His pasture lay along Little brook above Grove street. 
The same day Grove, west to Willow street, was re-stated. At this 
date, William Adams owned the vSt. Margaret property and its 




OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS. 563 

vicinity. Robert Johnson, whose house figures extensively in high- 
ways, lived at the southwest corner of Cook and Pine streets, and 
Sergt. Thomas Barnes was living in the old Johnson house of 1890. 
Likewise, the highway on the old Town Plot against the south bars 
was changed from the north to the south side of Lieut. Thomas 
Bronson's and Stephen Upson's lots, at their desire, and — occasionally 
it happened that after a highway was laid out past a man's farm, if 
he bought land across the road, the highway would, at his request, 
slip around to the other side of his new land in the most accommo- 
dating manner. In a few instances, after the laying out of a high- 
way, the bounds became lost and the work was all gone over again. 
This occurred notably in a Scott's Mountain road.* 

In 1753, " Upon the Desire of Lieut. Jacob Blackslee and many 
other of the Neighbours," a highway that went up Twich Grass 
brook was altered, because where it was laid "some part of the way 
was so bad that it was very difficult to make It Feazable to Travill 
In." In the alterations made "the town was put to no charge, for 
the inhabitants that requested it bore the charge of it." That part 
of the highway to Derby the west side or Twelve Mile hill was also 
*' found to be unpassable " and a new one laid out from Hawkins's 
corner to the east side of Toantic brook, to Derby bounds. Where 
new highways were laid out through a man's land in alteration of 
an old one, the old highway was given to him in exchange. See 
"The Town and Tompkins's Agreement, Vol. I, of Highways, p. 122. 
The simple acknowledgment of this exchange on the highway 
records, signed by land owner and the selectmen, was sufficient 
evidence of title for town or individual. From 1750 onward, these 
changes in highways are so numerous that to follow them is im- 
practicable. One meets agreements like the following, in 1754: 

We have agreed that the highway laid across our farms shall run by Daniel 
Sanford's door between his house and barn straight across to Ezekiel Sanford's 
house, from thence to Samuel Peck's house on the west side, and from thence south 
about forty rods, and from thence west to the highway between Mr. Hall's and my 
land. Samuel Peck, 

Ezekiel Sanford, 
Daniel Sanford. 

Our Watertown road of to-day dates from Nov. 27th, 1753, begin- 
ning at the bridge, and running to the upper Woodbury road, above 
the present school-house. The rest of the way was laid out later and 
went through Edmund Tompkins's land by way of an exchange for 
an older highway. The last highway that Mr. Southmayd recorded 

* See Vol. I, pages 117 and 118, Waterbury Highways. 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 
564 

WIS laid out May 8th, 1755, and recorded May, lotli, and is, I think, 
the only one to which he failed to append his name. The highway 
was from Dr. Powers's corner to a former highway at Timothy 
Porter's corner. It ran from Bedlam (in present Middlebury). 

The first one recorded by Thomas Clark was the formal layout 
of the Farmington road from Farmington boimds to Willow street, 
in 1-54. From the southwest corner of George Nichols's house lot 
(on which the new High wSchool building will stand), across to Mr. 
Jonathan Baldwin's line on East Main street, was nine rods. 
From Baldwin's land on the south side, the line of the street was 
run to Center Square on Ebenezer " Wakelee's" land; on the north 
side of the street on Thomas Bronson's and James Nichols's land to 
the same point "Through the Town street" to Willow street, it was 
laid the same breadth as it then was, "butting on each side on the 
ends of each man's house lot, as it was then fenced," and the bound- 
aries were set at the corner of each man's lot by Thomas Clark, 
John Scovill, John Judd and Thomas Porter, until they came to 
Ebenezer Bronson's and John Scovill's corners, or to the long-time 
Judge Kingsbury and Judge Bronson corners— now belonging to 
Frederick Nuhn and F. H. Humphrey. 

The first money paid by the town for land for a highway appears 
in the case of Isaac Castle, who at the time had gone to Northbury 
to live. The highway eastward from Northbury bridge was turned 
through his land, and he accepted the old highway and nine shil- 
lings in money. By 1758, highways began to receive their third 
alteration, or layout. At this time the surveyors were giving 
much attention and time to the requirements in the southwest 
quarter. In 1759, the selectmen of Waterbury and Litchfield having 
met and perambulated the town line and agreed on the placing of 
the monuments, they discharged each other from service for three 
years. 

When we find in the year 1762, about twenty highways laid 
out, or re-surveyed with alterations, in a single neighborhood, the 
effort to catch even glimpses of the swift changes taking place m 
the township and condensing them in a single chapter seems futile, 
and the question of where the men were found to work them is a 
serious one, although one day's work in the year for each man, had, 
perhaps, been increased to four days at that period. 

In 1765 a re-survey of that part of the Country road to New 
Haven was made "from Gideon Hikcox to town." It began at his 
house (the late Josiah Culver's last homestead) in Naugatuck, and 
retraced the old route down the hollow between the cemeteries (at 
that point connecting with the road that led to the old first bridge — 



OLD EIOHWAYS AND STREETS. 565 

where the clam now is) and ran l3y Beebe's land, by or through 
Capt. Thomas Porter's land, by Beebe's house, on the west side of 
William Hoadley's mill, and between Tinker's house and Thomas 
Porter's house (given to Thomas, by his father, Capt. Thomas, thir- 
teen days before). This survey places this old house, still standing, 
within fourteen rods of Hoadley's mill, on the bank of the brook, 
thus giving us information concerning its removal since that date, 
which tradition confirms. One leaf of this survey is missing, also a 
leaf from the re-survey in 1 771 of the Hopkins road of 1729, which 
ran from James Baldwin's mill, Hoadley's in 1765, east to Hopkins' 
farm, and southwest to the New Haven road. 

In 1776, The touni and propriefers chose a committee for the pur- 
pose of re-surveying "the Highway that goeth to Woodbury." 
They began on Christmas Day. Hitherto, the surveys to Wood- 
bury had been made by starting from the top of West vSide hill. 
This time, they began at Mr. Andrew Bronson's corner by his house 
(Judge Kingsbury's), and ran across West Main street 4 rods and 
II feet for the breadth of the street and ran west 15' 50' north 
43 rods, where the width of the road was reduced to 68 feet. When 
it reached the bridge the road was three rods wide. The old 
crossing place of the river had been 8 rods below where this survey 
placed it, so the road was widened at the river to 11 rods, by 
turning down the river 8 rods, which added to the 3 made it 11, in 
order to meet the old path. The west side the river, it started 11 
rods wide, and wound up the hill in various widths until it came 
to the old 20 rod highway where the layout of 1720 started, from 
which point onward it followed for the greater part of the way 
the first survey, and its intermediate alterations. 

THE ERA OF TURNPIKE ROADS AND STAGE COACHES, 

During the war the task of maintaining the highways became 
especially burdensome by reason of the absence of many of the 
young workers. One by one the towns of the State applied to the 
General Assembl}^ that the roads might be cared for by taxation. 
The river roads were the most difficult to keep in order, being 
washed by freshets, and from 1740 onward the work of building 
bridges had been unending — therefore, when the era of turnpike 
roads arrived, the people stood apparently willing to receive all the 
good it might bring to them. It would cost too much money for 
the taxpayers to convert existing roads into "dug-roads" and 
"turnpikes" and so capital — which came to bless and to antagonize 
the people — received a welcome. 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 
566 

Toll was first taken in this state in 1792. It was where the high- 
way ran throuo-h the Mohegan reservation between New London 
and Norwich, and was collected three years before the turnpike road 
between New London and Norwich was incorporated. A little later, 
toll was taken on the " Stage Road " through Greenwich, and in 
1794 a "toll gate" was established on the "Post Road" from Nor- 
wich to Providence. 

The first turnpike company incorporated in the state was the 
Oxford company. It ran its stage-coaches through Litchfield to 
Massachusetts. 

In 1797 came The Straits Turnpike Co. It was established to 
build a turnpike road from New Haven court house to the court 
house in Litchfield. The first meeting of the company was at the 
house of Irijah Terril in Waterbury (Salem Society), in Nov., 1797. 
Three turnpikes were to be erected on this road— one at some 
proper place between the house of Elihu Harrison in Litchfield and 
the house of John Foot in Watertown; one between the house of 
Joseph Nettleton in Watertown and Salem Bridge in Waterbury, 
and the other between the place in the highway called The Straits 
(of Beacon Hill brook) in Woodbridge and the school house north 
of Noadiah Carrington's house in that town. 

This road, in its day, engendered much bitterness and strife. The 
people of Waterbury centre wanted to have it pass through the vil- 
lage, which was by many persons considered the natural way for 
it. Aaron Benedict was one of the incorporators, and his influence 
with the other directors, it is said, prevailed with them to have the 
road pass his house, on the plea that that was the most direct route. 
Waterbury centre was side-tracked and dissatisfied, while Water- 
town and Salem Bridge grew apace. It became an accepted route 
between New Haven and Albany and during busy seasons a pro- 
cession of teams was passing over it night and day. One is not 
surprised that Waterbury grew restless and longed for the quieting 
influence of " stage " horn and wheels. 

At length the bridge at Salem needed repairing, and the Turn- 
pike company for its own convenience, apparently, made some slight 
repairs, which Waterbury refused to pay for. Finally, a freshet 
took away the bridge and the town proposed to make the company 
replace it, but the company sued the town for a new one and suc- 
ceeded in showing that their layout did not include the bridge. 
Just above the bridge, across the low land bordering the river, the 
company built a dyke to protect the road from overflow during 
freshets, which, it was claimed, turned the water under the bridge 
with so much force as to undermine one of the abutments and let 



OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS. 567 

fall the new bridge that the company had compelled the town to 
build. The town sued the company for damages, but obtained no 
redress. 

This was, perhaps, the first contest between the Corporation and 
the People of Connecticut. The contest has gone on at large from 
that time to the present — and has ended at last, it is said, in the 
State being complete!}^ and comfortably swallowed by a railroad 
company. 

After Waterbury centre was thoroughly beaten in trying to do 
anything with The vStraits Turnpike Co., the people resolved to have 
a turnpike road of their own, and in October, 1801, "The Waterbury 
River Turnpike Company " was incorporated. It was to run from 
a point near the center of Naugatuck, about forty miles, to the 
north line of the state. Among the incorporators were Noah M. 
Bronson of Waterbury and Asher Blakeslee of Plymouth. The dam- 
ages to individuals for land taken, were to be paid by the town 
wherein such land lay before May i, 1S02. Four turnpikes or gates 
for the collection of toll were allowed — one in Colebrook, in Tor- 
rington, at the bridge place across Waterbury river by Samuel Re}- 
yolds' house in Plymouth (whereby we have the name Reynolds 
Bridge), "and one other at or near the house of Jared Byington, Escj., 
in Waterbury (Salem)." "Reynolds' bridge" was to be built and 
kept in repair by the company. Other bridges, that the towns had 
been liable by law to build and maintain, were still left to the towns. 
The stock consisted of 1680 shares — the value of a share not stated. 

At each of the four turnpikes the fares were 4 cents for each 
person or horse — for each chaise with one horse and passengers, 
i2}'2 cents — for each four-wheeled pleasure carriage or stage-coach 
25 cents. No animal was allowed to pass the gate without the pay- 
ment of one-half a cent. Exceptions were made. If a man were 
going to church, or to a society meeting, to a funeral, to a town or 
freeman's meeting, or to a gristmill, to military duty, or, if he lived 
within two miles of the gate and went not more than two miles 
beyond it on his farming business, he paid no toll. Four years later, 
another gate was permitted, and in 1822 there was one provided for, 
south of the point where Spruce brook comes to the river (above 
Waterville). 

As the vStraits Turnpike Company was the first to inaugurate 
the War of Corporations versus The People, so the Waterbury River 
Turnpike Company was the first to wound the community by dese- 
crating the graves of the fathers — its road being built along the east 
side of the river above Salem Bridge, between the cemetery and the 
river, on land properly belonging to the cemetery. The woi'k was 



^g niSTOllY OF WATERBUBT. 

carried on by dig-ging into the bank and undermining the graves, 
without any support being furnished, so that some of the earliest 
buried and principal of the forefathers had their bones exposed by 
the action of the elements and were left sliding down and scattered 
about for the gaze of the indifferent passer-by. This action was 
seconded by the Derby railroad, which was built through an Indian 
burying ground and the ancient bones and buried implements were 
shoveled out like rubbish. 

The era of turnpikes brought the era of taverns on a large scale. 
Many of them became notable. On the New Haven and Litchfield 
route were Bishop's tavern at Watertown,* Selah vScovill's a mile 
north, Simeon Smith's at Morris, Daniel Beecher's and Irijah 
Terril's at Naugatuck, Ahira Collins's at Straitsville, and on the 
Plymouth route Samuel Judd's held its own at least to 1816, in 
which year, the inn-keepers were Daniel Beecher (Salem), Samuel 
Judd, and Stiles Thompson (Middlebury). 

It was said that at a certain date the stock of the Waterbury 
River Turnpike Co., was "all owned" or at least controlled by two 
men, Victory Tomlinson, and one of the Bronsons at Waterville. 
The story is also told that Tomlinson owned all the turnpike from 
his neighborhood (Mount Tobe) to New Haven, and, that he, not 
being known, was arrested as a vagrant as he sat one day by the 
wayside eating his dinner. He defended himself by saying that 
he was on his own property. Being asked to explain, he replied 
that he "owned all the turnpike." It was said to be his ambition 
to own all the land between Mount Tobe and New Haven. 

It often occurred, at about that time, that capitalists made them- 
selves conspicuous by their shabbiness and coarse manners, and 
were mistaken for suspicious characters. Indifference to public 
opinion in the matter of dress and social observances on the part 
of those who were rich and thought themselves above criticism, led 
to strange complications, and furnished abundant and abiding anec- 
dotes for the story teller. 

The Naugatvick valley was a centre of the turnpike interest, it 
being not only the home of the earliest turnpike road in the state, 
but was itself traversed about 1820 by the Humphreysville and 
Salem road, which was cut into the foundations of the hills along 
the east side of the river. It was also the starting point of other 
roads. In 18 12, came the Southington and Waterbury turnpike 
road, which is now called the Aleriden road. The western gate was 
within two hundred rods of the house of Reuben Lewis, in Wolcott. 



* There were several others less conspicuous— in fact on all much travelled roads a tavern sign \yas to 
be seen every two or three miles— teamsters had their favorite stopping places, and in this way farmers found 
a market for hay and grain. F. J. K. 



OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS. 



569 



In 1823, the Woodbury and Waterbury Turnpike road was pro- 
jected and probably accomplished. 

Notwithstanding- the fact that Waterbury centre was not on the 
main turnpike road from New Haven to Litchfield, it steadily grew 
in numbers, and its activities were increased, as will be seen by the 
following "Assessments on Mechanics, &c., in Waterburv in 1816 ": 



ATTORNEYS. 

Legrand Bancroft, 
Bennet Bronson, 
Cyrus Clark, 
Samuel Frisbie. 

PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS. 

Edward Field, 
Joseph Porter, 
Nimrod Hull, 
Jesse Porter. 

INN KEEPERS. 

Daniel Beecher, 
Samuel Judd, 
Stiles Thompson. 

TRADERS. 

Burton & Leavenworth, 
Lampson & Clark, 
E. & A. Spencer. 

GRIST MILLS. 

Leavenworth, Hayden & Scovill, 
Lois Payne, 
Jobamah Gunn, 
Jesse Wooster. 

SAW MILLS. 

Eli Adams & Co. , 
N. Piatt, 
Levi Wooster, 
Benj. Farrel, 
Asa Hoadley, 
Elias Clark & Co., 
David Downs. 

CARDING MACHINES. 

Herman Payne, 
Alfred Piatt & Co. 

CLOCK MAKERS. 

Clark, Cook & Co. 

BUTTON MAKERS. 

Leavenworth, Hayden & Scovill, 
Amasa Goodyear, 
Grilley & Wooster, 
Scott & Beebe. 



BELL FOUNDER. 

Erastus Lewis. 

WOOLLEN FACTORY". 

Scovill, Lampson & Co, 

FLAX MILL. 

Smith, Piatt & Co. 

TANNERS AND SHOEMAKERS. 

Ashbel Stevens, 
Andrew Bryan, 
Culpepjjer Hoadley. 

CLOTHIERS. 

Daniel Steele, 
Leveritt Candee. 

TAILOR. 

Asahel Adams. 

SADDLER. 

Moylen Northrop. 

HATTER. 

Elijah Hotchkiss. 

COOPER. 

Anson Sperry. 

BLACKSMITHS. 

James Brown, 
Martin Stephens, 
David Stephens, 
Lyman Hitchcox, 
Obed Tuttle, 
Jesse Scott, 
Thaddeus Hotchkiss, 
Elisha Smith. 

CARPENTERS AND JOINERS, 

Lemuel Porter, 
John Downs, 
Samuel Root, 
Chauncey Root, 
David Prichard, Jr. 
Dyer Hotchkiss, 
William Hoadley, Jr., 
Richard Ward, 
Nathaniel Carroll, 
Eliel Mann. 



BISTORT OF WATERBURT. 

57° 

During the period between 1797 and 1826, some one hundred 
and twenty turnpike roads were constructed. The Waterbury road 
was annulled in 1862, but before that date the road had been given 
up, except for about eight miles of its southernmost portion, 
whereon it kept a toll-gate between Waterbury and Naugatuck. 

In 185 1 Plank roads came into repute. vSeven were constructed 
in three vears. The Waterbury and Cheshire Plank Road Co. was 
incorporated in 1852. Three Waterbury men were among the incor- 
porators, William H. vScovill, John P. Elton and Arad Welton. The 
capital stock was ^20,000. Shares $50 each. The toll-gates were at 
least three miles asunder, with a toll not exceeding three cents a 
mile for any vehicle drawn by two animals. 

As this is written the last turnpike road in Connecticut passes 
out of existence, the committee of the superior court, Judge Brew- 
ster, F. J. Kingsbury and C. S. Davidson having made their report 
on the "Derby turnpike" — which report values the franchise at 
eight thousand dollars, upon the payment of which sum the road 
passes to the towns through which it runs, New Haven, Orange, 
and Derby. 

The following interesting history of the " Bury Road " is given 
by ^Ir. Kingsbury: 

THE BURY ROAD. 

About 1840 Silas Hoadley, who lived at Grey stone, tried to per- 
suade the town of Waterbury to build a road from Downs's saw 
mill, half a mile above Waterville on the Hancock brook, to the 
Plymouth line a little below his house. The distance was not 
much over a mile, but it was very rocky. The Waterbury authori- 
ties did not think the convenience of the road warranted the 
expense and declined to build it Then Hoadley brought a petition 
to the County commissioners, and after a long hearing with able 
counsel and a cloud of witnesses the commissioners ordered the 
town to build the road. In the testimony a great deal was said 
about its being a better way than we had heretofore of reaching 
Plymouth Hill and Bristol— also that it shortened the distance 
from the Waterbury factories to large tracts of woodland, etc., etc. 
The road was built at a cost, I think, of about $1700. It made a 
very picturesque drive along the valley of the Hancock brook and 
some one gave it the name of " Bury " road, which it retained as 
long as it existed. The road crossed the brook near Downs's saw 
mill, and went the rest of the way to Hoadley's on the east side. 
In 1853 or 4, the Hartford, Providence and Fishkill R. R. was laid 
out taking this road from the bridge north and entirely destroying 
It. Suits were brought against the railroad to get damages or a 



OLD HIGHWAYS AND STREETS. 571 

new road, and I think the case went to the Supreme court, but 
through some legal technicality nothing was accomplished. Then 
Mr. Hoadley began another long and expensive fight to compel the 
town to build a road on the west side of the brook. A road was 
built there, but I have the impression that Mr. Hoadley failed in 
his suit and built the road at his own expense. After a few years 
Mr. Hoadley died — a freshet carried away a considerable portion of 
the road and it has now been impassable for several years. It is 
a great saving in distance — and would make a very pretty drive and 
really ought to be rebuilt — although perhaps the mere economic 
use would hardly justify it. Mr. Hoadley had acquired a competence 
in the manufacture of clocks, but his fortune was seriously impaired 
by his expenses in connection with this bit of road. Probably if he 
had built it entirely himself in the first instance it would have been 
much more economical. 



CHAPTER XXXVIII. 

THK WATER-POWERS OF WATERBURY — FIRST THE GRIST MILL AND THEN 
THE SAW MILL — SOME OF THE BEGINNINGS OF LARGE MANUFAC- 
TORIES — OTHER ENTERPRISES THAT HAVE BEEN FORGOTTEN A 

CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO STREAMS. 

THE Story of Waterbury's industrial development is in its 
beginning- the story of Waterbury's water-powers, and these 
next demand our attention. If in these days of steam and 
electricity we are tempted to forget how largely industrial devel- 
opment owes its initiative to the water-power, we are reminded, by 
the latest engineering feat, that progress often doubles on itself. 
The discarded water-power of yesterday finds its vindication in the 
harnessing of Niagara to-day, and the transmission of its power to 
places of manufacture many miles distant. Along the track of the 
most matter-of-fact narrative, a chronicle of Waterbury's water- 
powers for example, lie curious suggestions, if one but looks for 
them. These, however, can be only hinted at in this general way. 



GRAIN MILLS. 

As Mattatuck was twenty miles from Farmington, the site of the 
nearest,* or at any rate the most accessible, mill for grinding grain, 
and as there was no road but a cart path over the mountain, one of 
the obvious needs of the new settlement was a "grist mill." The 
Grand committee under date of November 27, 1679, either of their 
own motion or at the suggestion of the townspeople, advised the 
inhabitants to build a sufficient corn mill (doubtless meaning by 
"corn" grain of all kinds), and said further: 

And for encouragement we grant such persons [builders of the mill] shall have 
thirty acres of land laid out, and shall be and remain to them and their heirs and 
assigns forever, he or they maintaining the said grist mill as aforesaid forever. 



* A=^°''d'ng to Davis's " History " a mill was built at Yalesville in 1677, and there was another on 
harton s brook in the lower part of Wallinsford, built in 1674. Either of these was nearer than Farming- 
ton but probably there was no practicable road in that direction. There is mention in a layout of land in 
1^686. near the junction of Beaver pond brook with Mad river, of the place " where the mill stones were brought 
7" h w ^^°"''' '^^'"'"^ ''^^® ''"" brought from Farmington by this route, and it may be that the stones 
rom the Wharton brook mill, which seems to have been replaced by the one at Yalesville, were brought 

wTld' } ^*'"'" ""^ ""^ """''^ ^^ "" "'^""■''^ '■°"'^' ''"' evidently not at this time an easy one, or the fact 
wou d not have made sufficient impression to be so noted. They may have come this way from New Haven. 



OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 



573 



Stephen Hopkins, who was the owner of a mill in Hartford, accepted 
the proposal, built a mill and sent his son John to run it, biit did not 
come here himself or remove his family hither. The mill and the 
land allotment attached to it became the property of John. He was 
from the beginning of his settling here a prominent citizen, and his 
descendants have perhaps furnished more men of distinction than 
any other family to be found in the town's history. The mill was 
built soon after the committee's vote of advice. It was perhaps 
already arranged for, and it seems to have been satisfactory, as on 
February 5, 1680, the record of the committee says: 

It is further concluded that Stephen Hopkins, who hath built a mill at that 
plantation, shall have the thirty acres appointed and entailed in a former order to 
such as shall erect a mill there, and so much more laud added to the said thirty acres 
as may advance the same to be in value of £100 allotment. There is also a house 
lot containing in estimation two acres granted to Stephen Hopkins as conveniently 
as may be to suit the mill, and the aforesaid Thomas Judd and John Stanley and 
the present townsmen [are] to lay it out to him, and also a three acre lot, according 
as the other inhabitants have granted to be laid out [to them ?] by these same per- 
sons for him. 

The mill was built on Mad river (sometimes called "Mill river" 
from this fact) where the vScovill Manufacturing- company's factory 
now stands.* The dam was placed across the narrowest point, 
where the two hills approach each other, very near the north end 
of the present south rolling mill. The mill stood immediately 
south of the dam, the north end of it resting in part on the wall of 
the dam. It had a fall of about eight feet. Portions of the lower 
timbers of the old dam, or its immediate representative, remained 
in place until about 1876, when they were finally torn out in the 
progress of improvetnent. The mill dam was open to the road for 
a short distance above the mill. It was utilized sixty years ago as 
a place to water horses and to wash wagons, as a bathing place for 
boys, and also for baptism by immersion. The writer remembers 
on one occasion having seen the ice broken away for this last 
named purpose. 

The accompanying illustration shows the situation of the mill f 
with reference to the pond, probably as it was from the beginning, 
although the building here pictured was not very old. The mill 
was in the north end of the building next to the pond, and the mill 



* When the mill was built the name of the river was ^^ Roaring; river." After the building of the mill, 
the name vvas changed to " Mill river." Because the mill dam sent the water back on Daniel Porter's three- 
acre lot, the town allowed him a part of the highway on Grand street, near the corner of Bank. 

t This cut appears again in Vol. II, p. 277. The original sketch was made by Lucien I. Bisbee, book- 
keeper in 183s for J. M. L. & W. H. Scovill. In the cut in Vol. II, p. 278, dated 1S58, the building in the 
foreground is the office, and stands on the site of the miller's house. 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

574 

door is seen near the north end of the building-, looking in the cut 
more like a lon^r window than a door. The south end of the build- 
in-r is the rolling mill. The building on the extreme right is the 
buUon factory, built in 1830 to take the place of one on the same 
site which was burned. The miller's house at this date stood m 
front of the mill on the west side of the road. The house lot 
of two acres was at the corner of East Main street and Exchange 
place, the property now owned by the heirs of William Brown. 
It'extended east to Great brook, and the house stood fifty or sixty 
feet westward from the brook. Later it became the property of 
Ephraim Warner and for many years prior to its demolition, some- 
where about 1840, was known as the Ephraim Warner house. At 
one time it was a hotel.* John Hopkins had also another house near 

the mill, probably for the 
miller. A portion of the 
thirty acres was laid out 
to him south of Union 





.^'.-*"ite.iitJBB ^^^'^^^^ running down to, 
tywji^l I rp^W" and perhaps below, Liberty 
■]i.^r^^^^^5^^- ''^*S^ street. This w^hole tract 
^'*5F-;, 40^^ ^vag known for many years 

as Mill plain. It is some- 
times called on the records " Hopkins's :\Iill plain," and sometimes 
"Hopkins's plain." This is to be distinguished from "Sawmill 
plain," at the east end of Waterbury. Several pieces were given in 
different parts of the town to complete the thirty-acre grant. To 
carry out the agreement in regard to the ;:^ioo propriety the for- 
feited allotment of Deacon Langton was granted to Hopkins, the 
provision being made that one-half the allotment should be entailed 
to the mill, as were the thirty acres in case the committee "granted 
the same." On February 16, 1682-3, the committee ratified the 
action, naming John Hopkins as grantee. This is the record: 

In reference to what lands are granted by the inhabitants of jNIattatiick to John 
Hopkins the present miller we do well approve of, and in case they shall see cause 
to ease the entail of any part of the /'loo allotment we shall not object against it. 

Occasional troubles between the town and the miller arose which 
gave rise to several modifications of the original agreement, and a 
removal by vote of the town of the entail from some part of the 
land. On January 17, 1732-3, Stephen and Timothy, .sons of John 
Hopkins and executors of his will, conveyed their interest in the 
mill and the thirty acres to Jonathan Rakhvin, Jr., of Milford (who 

* See Vol. II, p. 224. 



OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 575 

was, however, Jonathan Baldwin, Sr., of Waterbury, as he had a son 
known as Jonathan Baldwin, Jr., also frequently as Colonel Bald- 
win). Jonathan Baldwin died in 1761, and the mill property passed 
to his heirs, and finally into the hands of Colonel Phineas Porter, 
who married Mr. Baldwin's granddaughter. In 1783 Phineas Porter 
conveyed it to Lieutenant Aaron Benedict and Captain Benjamin 
Upson, and thereafter for some years the mill is referred to on the 
record as "Benedict & Upson's mill." In 1805 Aaron Benedict sold 
his half to Lemuel Harrison, who, apparently, also accjuired 
Upson's half. In 1808 Lemuel Harrison sold his interest to Abel 
Porter, David Hayden, Daniel Clark and Silas Grille}', who con- 
stituted the firm of Abel Porter & Co., Waterbury's first gilt button 
makers. They purchased the property for the button business. 
The firm afterward became Leavenworth, Hayden & Scovill, then 
J. M. L. & W. H. Scovill, and finally the Scovill Manufacturing com- 
pany, as related in Volume II. 

The mill remained a mill long after there ceased to be any use 
for it. At last it got out of repair from lack of use. About 1850 
some men of no influence or standing attempted to raise the c^ues- 
tion whether the mill lands had not been forfeited by failure to keep 
up the mill. These lands for the most part had long before been sep- 
arated from the mill and sold to various persons. The equities were 
so evidently in favor of these holders that the ancient proprietors 
(as many as could be found) met and voted to release any supposed 
interest they might have under the mill grant. Dr. Bronson* has 
quite a full history of the matter, and seems inclined to the opinion 
that the proprietors acted without due authority. He apparently 
does not bear in mind the vote of the committee of February 6, 1682, 
giving the proprietor inhabitants the right to ease any j^art of the 
entail that they should see fit to, which right was certainly acted 
upon once, if only once. 

One would hardly expect that Mattatuck would remain depend- 
ent upon one grist mill for fifty years. But the present writer can 
find no allusion to any other in the records until November 25, 
1729, when John Warner deeded to James Williams a piece of land 
near "the new mill." This was at the mouth of Spruce brook, a 
small stream running into Steel's brook on the west side, from the 
north end of Bunker hill, the spot where now is the old dam of 
the Oakville company. The road at that time seems to have fol- 
lowed the stream more closely than at present, and to have passed 
by the mill. The following year (1730) John Sutliff from Branford 
built a grist mill at the falls of the Naugatuck about two miles 

* See his History of Waterbury, pp. S3-90. 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 
576 

below Thomaston, where Henry Terry afterwards had a woollen 
mill and where there is now a knife factory. A few years later 
there was a grist mill on Fulling Mill brook (p. 350). By this time 
grist mills had ceased to be a novelty and were built where and 
when thcv were wanted. Some of them will be alluded to as we 
follow up the history of the various streams. 



vSAW MILLS. 

Next in importance to the grist mill as a necessity for the set- 
tlers of Mattatuck, if not before it, comes the saw mill. Naturally 
then we find that the two were started practically at the same time. 
The first reference to the saw mill comes only three years after the 
vote to encourage the building of the grist mill — that is, accepting 
the reference (quoted below) as establishing the fact that the saw 
mill was in operation at that time. Be this as it may, the first saw 
mill was situated on the Mad river at Sawmill plain, and probably 
where the leather factory now is — some thirty rods south of the 
Meriden turnpike. Reference has been made (p. 218) to a piece 
of land laid out to Samuel Hickox, Jr., " three acres at the Pine 
swamp by the path that leads to the saw mill." This was on Jan- 
uary 3, 1686. Dr. Bronson (page 90) thought this might refer to the 
place where the clock factory now stands, a little south of Cherry 
street, and where it is known that there was an early saw mill. But 
Pine swamp, when Dr. Bronson wrote, had not been located, as it 
has been since. It is the swamp on the north side of the Meriden 
turnpike, just on the edge of the Sawmill Plain school district. 
Carrington brook runs through it, and it has been sometimes called, 
from that fact, " Carrington's swamp." vSo this seems to locate the 
early saw mill beyond a doubt. It is clear from the report of the 
committee* that they had clapboards there as early as 1682. They 
may have been "riven" like shingles and finished with broad-axe and 
draw-knife (they were sometimes made that way), and they may 
have been dragged over the mountain from Farmington. But 
boards would be wanted for many purposes, and in the excuses for 
delays in finishing buildings nothing appears about any difficulty 
in getting lumber. It looks, therefore, very much as if this saw 
mill might then have been in working order as early as 16S2. There 
appears to have been a grant of thirty acres of land to encourage 
the building of this mill, as there was in the case of the grist mill. 
The original record of this grant is probably on one of the lost 

♦See page 179. 



OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. ^jj 

leaves. At any rate nothing appears of it in the records until 
November 28, 1722,* when the proprietors by vote 

agree that the grant of thirty acres to the old saw mill proprietors shall stand good, 
only they shall be obliged to take it in the undivided land in one piece, or every 
one to take his part of the thirty acres by his own land. 

On April 15, 1723, we find this: 

There was laid out to Edmund Scott two acres wanting ten rods, at a place 
called Cotton Wool meadow, which land came to him by being a partner in the 
old saw mill. 

Why this delay was permitted when the early settlers seemed 
so avaricious of land, is not eas}- to imagine. One Macy (McKinney, 
Makenny, Mackey, or something ic/e/// sonaiis, the spelling varying 
greatly), had a ten acre grant near the first mill, and may have 
been the man in charge. He soon disappears. 

At a town meeting on January 6, 1698-9, liberty is given to set 
up a saw mill by the corn mill, on certain conditions. But at a 
meeting held in February, 1699-1700, this vote was cancelled, and 
leave was given to Sergeant Bronson, Deacon Judd, John Hopkins, 
vSamuel Hickox and John Richardson, to set up a saw mill at the 
corn mill, they making and maintaining two rods of the dam from 
the corn mill east. Whether anything was done under this vote 
there is no evidence, unless it be a vote passed March 18, 1701, by 
which Stephen Upson and Benjamin Barns were appointed a com- 
mittee to lay out the mill lot at the mill and what highways are 
needful for the '^ mils.'" This is distinctly written in the plural. 
The fact that it was necessary to lay out the highways about the 
mills more than ten years after the corn mill had been in use is 
significant. If there was a mill there it was probably on the bank 
near where the button factory afterwards stood. The owners of 
the mill at one time had a saw inill some distance lower down on 
the east side of the river, but nothing appears in regard to this 
until many years later. On January 30, 1 699-1 700, the town gave 
liberty "to them men that see cause for to set up a saw mill at the 
north end of the long hill, the liberty of the streeme and conven- 
iency of pounding [ponding?] " and the right to improve the land 
they needed to set the mill on and to lay logs and the like, the 
land to be their own so long as they maintained a saw mill at 
that place. No further trace of this mill is to be found. It may 
be added that after about 1720 saw mills increased in number 
rapidly. 

* Vol. I, Highways, page 413. 
37 



EISTOBY OF WATERS URY. 

FULLING MILLS. 

The conditions of life in the " Age of Homespun "—as described 
in a preceding chapter— included the process by which the wool 
from the back of a particular sheep became a coat on the back of a 
particular member of the family to whose flock that sheep belonged. 
It is not strange then to find indications that, in the fourteen 
years since the*' settlement of the town, there had been consider- 
able progress in sheep-raising, as attested by the record of January 
20, 1692 ''(page 330), that "there was sequestered the Great brook 
from Edmund vScott's lot down to vSamuel Hickox, Jr.'s, lot, for to 
build a fulling mill." As nearly as can be ascertained this sequester 
covers the ground at present occupied by the Waterbury Manufac- 
turing company, or possibly also the next privilege below, near 
where Nathan Prindle had a fulling mill some forty years later. 
Whether there was any fulling mill built at the time of the sequester 
is uncertain, but this same Samuel Hickox, Jr., went to Fulling Mill 
brook at Judd's meadow about ten years later than this, and in 1709 
had a fulling mill there which gave the brook its name, — the first 
regarding which we have positive evidence (see p. 347). A fulling- 
mill was not an elaborate structure. It is quite possible that Hickox 
may have had one on Great brook, and that there were others also. 
By a record of January 10, 1705, we find that two acres were granted 
to Dr. Daniel Porter at the south end of his land "for the conven- 
iency of setting up a fulling mill on Carrington brook," where he 
may have had one. By a record in April, 1737, we find that Nathan 
Prindle sold to Nathaniel Arnold a fulling mill which was near the 
corner of North Main and Cherry streets. Dr. Bronson thinks this 
mill was built about 1728. Not long after this, Nathan Beard built 
one on the Naugatuck at the mouth of Hancock brook. P'rom this 
time we find frequent references to fulling mills until about 1835, 
when the manufacture of domestic woollen cloth mostly ceased. By 
that time it was cheaper to buy than to manufacture it. 



WATER-POWERS IN GENERAL. 

THE NAUGATUCK. 

Persons who are unfamiliar with the early history of Waterbury 
have probably — and naturally — the impression that the foundation 
of the manufacturing business here is the water-power of the 
Naugatuck river. vSuch persons wall be surprised to learn that in a hun- 



OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 57p 

dred years, from (about) 1750 to 1849, there was but one place within 
the boundaries of the present town where the power of the Nauga- 
tuck river was used, namely, at Piatt's mills, about three miles 
south from the centre. It was the smaller affluents of the Nauga- 
tuck which furnished most of the power. Perhaps a brief notice of 
the mill sites on the various streams in their geog-raphical order is 
as simple a method as any of giving some account of the industries 
assisted by water-power. It is well nigh impossible, however, to 
make such a list exhaustive, so many ver}' small streams having at 
various times been titilized. In many of these cases all memory 
and trace of the work itself and the people who did it have 
disappeared. A considerable number also known to exist have not 
been definitely located. 

Beginning at the lower end of the ancient town, and proceeding- 
northward, the first power is Ward's, about a mile below Naugatuck. 
This was established by Richard Ward about 1835 for the manufac- 
ture of clocks. It has remained in the family and is still used 
for the manufacture of small brass goods. A power (2) lately 
abandoned and united with the one next above was last used by the 
Goodyear Metallic Rubber vShoe company, — before that by the 
Tuttle Manufacturing company. It was taken from the one above 
by extending the canal in 1847, and reunited in 1892. The old power 
(3) at Naugatuck centre (which appears first on the record in 1824) 
was used by Silas Grilley and Chauncey Lewis (Milo Lewis was 
with them later) in the manufacture of buttons.* The Platts mills 
property (4) was purchased by Lemuel Hoadley of Ezekiel Upson 
in 1772. There is no mention of a mill in the deed, but there is a 
reference to it as a landmark in a deed a few years later. The 
natural inference then is that Lemuel Hoadley built the mill soon 
after purchasing the property. About 1800 Jesse Hopkins had a 
nail factory on a portion of the property. The road to it was over 
the hill almost west from the turnpike passing near Elijah Nettle- 
ton's house. The mill stood on the east side of the present road, 
which was opened about fifty years ago. A canal ran parallel with, 
and near to, the river along the west side of the present road. 
Between this and the river were several small shops, including 
a saw mill, a flax breaker and a wire bench. There were various 
other industries pursued here, mostly in a small way. About 1849 
the Benedict & Burnham Manufacturing company (5) put in a tur- 

* J. M. L. & W. H. Scovill used the factory while rebuilding theirs, which was destroyed by fire in 1830. 
In 1831 it was sold to Sylvester Clark, who manufactured eight-day brass clocks; but about 1835 it was sold to 
John Tillou, who manufactured spinning machinery for some years. It is now owned by the Goodyear India 
Rubber Glove company. 



„ HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

560 

bine wheel at their factory which was turned by water from the 
Nauo-atuck. The fall was obtained by a deep tail-race running to a 
point known as "Long meadow bars" at the foot of "Nichols's 
meadow," and draining a small pool known as "Nichols's pond." 
This gave a fall of about nine feet, but it was abandoned about 1885. 
In 1848 a company called the Waterbury Water Power company 
was formed to utilize the power in the Naugatuck opposite the 
borough (6). By an arrangement with the Naugatuck Railroad 
company the canal was formed by building a raised track for the 
road. This privilege was first used by the Manhan Manufacturing 
company for making felt cloth; afterward by the American Flask 
and Cap company, and is now the property of the Waterbury Brass 
company. On March 7, 1737, Nathan Beard purchased of Daniel 
Porter a tract of land on the Naugatuck river, at the mouth of 
Hancock brook (7). Soon after, he had a grist mill there, and later 
a fulling mill. All trace of this privilege has long since disappeared. 
He sold the land, reserving the mill, to J. Scovill, in 1745. The mill 
was afterward owned by vSeba Bronson, who also had another on 
Steel's brook. There w^as a privilege (8) owned by Samuel Hickox 
some distance above Waterville, near the Brown bridge, so called — 
now abandoned. It was there in 1745 (see Bronson, page 99). The 
privilege (9) at the falls where John Sutliff built his mill in 1730, is, 
the writer thinks, the first in the town on the Naugatuck. It is now 
in Thomaston. It has been used for a woollen mill, a clock factor}-, 
and probably for other purposes; and is now used for a knife 
factory. 

LONG MEADOW BROOK. 

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the west, a short dis- 
tance below the central part of Naugatuck village. The first power 
on this stream is now occupied by the Dunham Hosiery company. 
For many years (i) it was used as a woollen mill by William C. 
De Forest. It was Scott's grist mill in 1770. Butler's house (p. 122) 
was near here, a little to the south. The Rubber works (2), long 
noted as having a wooden wheel of the largest diameter in the 
state (the writer thinks fifty-six feet), w^as formerly Candee's 
woollen mill. Silas Constant, Stephen Warner and others had a 
saw mill there (3) in 1777. How long it had been built is uncertain; 
probably not very long, from the phrases used. There was also 
a cluster of small powers at Millville (4 to 9) established, for the 
most part, in the middle or early half of the last century, by 
some members of the Gunn family. Nathaniel Gunn had a saw 
mill in 1739. Osborn's saw mill (10) was located on this stream. 
Samuel Wheeler had a saw mill (11) in 1749, and later a carding 



OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 581 

mill. Arah Ward had a grist mill (12) soon after. The stream from 
Towantic pond enters Long Meadow brook near this point. 
Towantic pond lies to the southwest and Long Meadow pond to 
the northwest. In Chapter IV (p. 40) the two are spoken of as one, 
but they are in fact half a mile or more apart. Long Meadow 
brook was often called Towantic brook in the record, which prob- 
ably accounts for the confusion of names. 

HOP BROOK. 

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the west a little below 
Union City. A privilege (i), now belonging to the Upson family, 
was first used by Eliel and Amory Mann for the manufacture of 
mouse traps, spools and other small wooden wares. It was used later 
by Lyman Bradley and Gilbert Hotchkiss in the manufacture of 
pocket cutlery. A privilege (2) sometimes spoken of as " the Falls," 
now known as Bradleyville, is the one used by Abram Wooster in 
1752 for a saw mill, and by Amasa Scovill in 1785. About 1840 Lyman 
Bradley made cutlery here, and since then Samuel Root has carried 
on the same business. (3) In 1781 James Porter sold Asa Leaven- 
worth, then of Watertown, a grist mill here. In the first half of this 
century Asa Fenn had an axe factory on or near the same place. 
In the interval it had changed hands many times. Isaac Bronson 
had a saw mill (4) at Break Neck— now Abbott's. This was proba- 
bly the first saw mill in that part of the town. There was also (5) 
a small shop near the " Dennis pla,ce," so called. 

FULLING MILL BROOK, NOW GENERALLY CALLED CITY BROOK. 

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the east at Union City. 
The first attempt (i) to utilize it for mill purposes was made by 
vSamuel Hickox, who setup a fulling mill before 1713.* Ebeneser 
Hickox (son of Samuel) built a grist mill on the same spot, soon 
after the year 1733. In 1737 he sold it to Hezekiah Rew with the 
house over the mill. Rew sold it the same year to James Baldwin, 
who deeded to William Hoadley of Branford and May Way of 
Waterbury in the year 175 1 about 200 acres of land w^ith the grist 
mill. Soon after, Hoadley bought out Way, and at Hoadley's death 
it went to his sons, William and Jude. The mill property was in 1799 
sold in part to Jared Byington. William Hoadley retained the mill 
and his house lot. Hoadle}^ ran the grist mill until about 1810, 
when he sold it to Ebenezer Scott. Byington deeded his part to his 
sons, Jesse and Isaac, and the}^ conveyed the property in 1808 to 

* See Bronson's History, page 92. 



o HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

Amasa Goodyear, Joseph Nichols, Henry G.rilley, Jr., and Joel M. 
Munson, under the firm name of the New Haven and Baltimore 
Button company. Their shops were a little east of the grist mill. 
Mention is made of a trip hammer shop, and a patent nail cutter 
(this trip hammer was probably the first one used in the town of 
Waterbury). Amasa Goodyear manufactiired forks, cast buttons, 
spoons and molasses gates. After Goodyear failed (about 1831) the 
factory was occupied by different parties until about 1842, when 
Clark Warner and Lampson Isbell commenced the manufacture of 
carding machines. Afterward the business was carried on under 
the name of the Naugatuck Machine company. Their buildings 
were destroyed by fire several years ago. A new building was erected 
and pumps were made for a short time. It is now occupied by a 
house builder, George Parks. There was a saw mill (2) mentioned 
as early as 175 1. It was probably a little east of the grist mill, 
but it may possibly have been as far up the brook as the ivory 
button shop mentioned below. The saw mill had disappeared 
before 1805. Edwin Scott had a carding mill (3) in operation on 
this mill site in 1805. Jairus Downs was running a clothier's shop 
at this place in the year 18 19. Amasa Goodyear built before 1831 
a store on or near this mill site. After Goodyear failed (about 
1831 or '32), Robert Isbell and Letsom Terrell made japanned tin but- 
tons in the store building. Since then George and Eldridge Smith 
made buttons in the old store. This building was used for a paper 
box shop when it was destroyed by fire a few years ago. It was 
never rebuilt. Lucian Judd built a shop (4) about 1819, in which 
he manufactured wooden buttons for a number of years. Lucian 
Judd and David Wooster (a brother of Jesse) here drew copper wire, 
about 1825, and continued this business for a considerable time. 
They were probably the first to draw copper wire in the town of 
Waterbury. Between 1830 and 1840 Smith & Hopkins made cloth 
buttons in this shop. Afterward Alonzo Wheeler entered the firm. 
About 1859 the business was removed to Saugatuck. The prop- 
erty is now owned by James Bird, who formerly made differential 
pulleys. He is now making buttons. Anson Smith and his son 
Harry built a shop (5) on this site about 1822. They manufactured 
ivory buttons. About the year 1826 they sold their plant to Amasa 
Goodyear, who made buttons and other similiar things. After Good- 
year failed, Asahel Smith and Oscar Hotchkiss made buttons at this 
place, and subsequently Asahel Smith and Harry Tomlinson also 
until about 1839. Ebcn Tuttle commenced the manufacture of 
hoes here about 1843, and continued the same until the Tuttle Man- 
ufacturing company was formed. They were later located below 



OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTUBES. 583 

the centre of Naugatuck. The Connecticut Cutlery company about 
1867 or 1868 built a new factory. Since they closed up their affairs 
the factory has remained most of the time unoccupied. At present 
D. & H. Pratt occupy the place as a thimble shop. Lorin Isbell (6) 
built a shop on this site about 1828. He made bone buttons here 
for a number of years. Afterward Oscar Hotchkiss and Amos Ellis 
manufactured buttons here for a short time. About the year 1849 
Harris and Robert Isbell made covered buttons in the old build- 
ing. They enlarged the shop and continued in the button busi- 
ness for two or more years. Afterward Silas and Perkins Grilley 
made ivory headed nails at this place. The old shop and the saw 
mill that stood near by have both disappeared. The shop (7) that 
Asahel Smith formerly occupied was built about 1840. A larger 
factory was built several years ago by his son, Edwin F. Smith. 
The firm is now E. F. Smith & Son. They manufacture ivory and 
metal buttons. The Union Knife company (8) was organized about 
1850. It was destroyed by fire several years ago and never rebuilt. 
A button shop (9) was built by a son of Ransom Russell about 1850. 
After being occupied by W. H. K. Godfrey as a thimble factory, it 
was for a time used by D. Pratt. It was destroyed by fire and never 
rebuilt. About 1855 W. S. Kelly built a suspender factory (10) here, 
using it for a short time. Nothing has been done here for years. 
The shop (11) first occupied by Monroe Terrill for buttons, is now 
used?by H. Twitchell & Son, manufacturers of safety pins and sim- 
ilar articles. On a branch from the south is a shop (12) where 
Samuel Grilley made metal buttons about 1807, and Horace Smith 
about 184 1.* 

SMUG BROOK. 

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the east, about two miles 
below the centre of Waterbury. Near its mouth is the factory of 
the Smith & Griggs company (i). This privilege was originally an 
iron foundry built by Merrit Nichols or his father, Joseph, early in 
this century. About 1838, Dr. David Prichard made german silver 
spoons there. A few years later Henry A. Matthews, John Forest 
and others started a manufactory of small metal wares, calling it 
the Hope Manufacturing company. This gave the settlement 
the name of Hopeville, which it has since retained. Spencer 
and Bennet Prichard had a small shop (2) about half a mile up the 
stream. This subsequently (about thirty years since) passed into 
the possession of William T. Mabbott, who manufactured buttons 

* For this account ot the privileges on Fulling Mill brook, and for facts respecting several other privil- 
eges in Naugatuck, we are indebted to Mr. William Ward. 



584 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

and other pearl g-oods. This gave to the ponds there the name of 
Pearl lakes. 

MAD RIVF.K. 

This stream enters the Naug-atuck from the east, at the south- 
ern part of the city of Waterbury. The first power was utilized 
(i) by Colonel William Leavenworth about 1802. In iSio he leased 
it with "a turning shop standing- thereon." Its subsequent history 
is merg-ed in that of the Benedict & Burnham Manufacturing 
company. On the east side of the river, near where Daniel Steele's 
cloth dressing factory stood later, there was a saw mill (2), prob- 
ably the one belong-ing to the Baldwins, on which they paid 
taxes in 178S. It is possible that this saw mill was the outcome 
of the permission given to erect a saw mill near the grist mill 
in 1699, as it belonged in 1788 to the people who owned the 
grist mill, although it was probably a later enterprise. On the 
west side, where the American mills now are, Colonel Leaven- 
worth established a saw mill and grist mill about 1800. In 1804 
he deeded an interest to Daniel Steele. In 1805 they leased a 
portion of the grist mill to Towsey, Gibbs & Co., for a carding 
machine. Daniel Steele subsequently had a carding and cloth 
dressing shop on the east side of the river. About 1830 this was 
occupied under a lease by Joel Johnson. On the west side Colonel 
Leavenworth carried on clock making, somewhat extensively for 
the times. After his failure, wood turning, small hardware making 
(called whitesmithing), pearl button making, and other small indus- 
tries were pursued there until 1830, when Charles D. Kingsbury 
sold the property to the Naugatuck (afterwards Beecher) Manufac- 
turing company. After its failure E. E. Prichard, Julius Hotch- 
kiss and C. B. Merriman began the manufacture of India rubber 
suspenders there. This, later, became the American Suspender 
company, and finally the American Mills company. 

The Scovill Manufacturing company (3) occupies the site of the 
first grist mill, the oldest privilege in town. It remained a grist 
mill, although portions of it may have been used for other purposes, 
until September 21, 1808, when Lemuel Harrison deeded it to Abel 
Porter and others. Then it became a button factory with a grist 
mill attached, as is elsewhere related. About 1836 Leonard Piatt 
built a small factory (4) for the manufacture of button eyes, a few 
rods west of Dublin street and south from Mad river. The water 
was taken from the river some distance east of Dublin street, and 
the ground now covered by the Meriden and Waterbury railroad 
station was used as a reservoir. About 1840 this privilege was 
merged in that of the Scovill Manufacturing company. Not long 



OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 585 

after, the button-eye business was purchased by David B. Hurd, who 
continued it until his death, at a shop near the present site of the 
church of the Sacred Heart. As it may not be noticed elsewhere, 
it is proper to say here that before the invention of the automatic 
machine by Leonard Piatt, button eyes were made in a slow way 
on a machine worked by a crank and lever, by hand and foot power. 
This machine of Piatt's was a very important improvement. He 
was a staunch Episcopalian, a steady church-goer. Before he per- 
fected his machine he worked at it a long time, had spent all his 
money and was much depressed. Joel Johnson, with whom he lived, 
related that one Sunday, while in church, all at once Piatt's man- 
ner changed; he looked bright and clear, sat np straight, lifted his 
head and paid close attention to the sermon. The next day the 
machine was completed. Johnson, however, had too high a regard 
for Piatt to ask invidious questions. 

What is known of late years as the Leather factory (5)— and prior 
to that as the John D. Johnson property— appears to have been first 
utilized in 1813, when James Scovill, Austin Steel, and the firm of 
Leavenworth, Hayden & Scovill, established a woollen factory there. 
They were compelled to close it on the opening of the market to 
English goods by the peace of 1815. There lies before the writer an 
application for insurance on the property, under the name of the 
Waterbury Woollen Manufacturing company. It is without date, 
but was probably made when the buildings were new. It describes 
the property as consisting of one boarding house, 36 by 40, of two 
stories; one factory, 54 by 34, of three stories, heated by a Russian 
stove; one finishing shop, 30 by 21, of two stories, all of wood; one 
dye house, 40 by 24, sides and ends of stone. The machinery, in- 
cluded in two buildings, comprised four single carding machines, 
one double, one picker, one jenny, twelve broad looms, one narrow 
loom, one shearing machine, two presses, two kettles, and two blue 
vats. The value of the whole (given by items) is $12,260. About 
1830, Austin, Daniel and Ransom Steel, with some out-of-town capi- 
tal, again attempted the manufacture of woollen goods, but were not 
successful. John D. Johnson carried on both the woollen and a 
metal business there for some years, from about 1833 to 1848. The 
plant then became a tannery under the charge of Harlow Roys, 
Samuel N. Bradley, William Davis and others, which business was 
continued until about 1870, when the privilege was absorbed in that 
of the vScovill Manufacturing company. 

The site of Rogers & Brother's plated ware factory (6)— or near 
the site — was very early a saw mill. It was probably built by Mr. 
Southmayd or one of his sons. William Rowley had carding and 



586 HISTORY OF WATERBUttY. 

cloth dressing works here about the middle of the last century, and 
associated with him in the business, or before him, was one George 
Gordian. William Rowley, Jr., succeeded his father, and they 
owned considerable land about there, which was long known as 
the Rowley farm. The privilege remained dormant for a long time, 
but was brought into use by Holmes, Hotchkiss, Brown & Elton 
about 1 83 1, and was for many years a successful brass factory. 
Pins were first made in Waterbury at this place. On the site of 
Barnard, wSon & Co.'s shear factory (7), at the Revolution, was a mill 
known as Hough's. It was owned by Judge Hopkins; probably 
Hough was the miller. Hopkins sold it to Deliverance Wakelee, who 
sold it to Captain George Nichols in 1781. In 1796 Joseph Payne 
had it. About 1835 Joel Johnson had a woollen (satinet) factory 
here, and later it was used for making cotton warps. There was a 
small shop (8) forty or fifty rods above that just mentioned, but fed 
by the same pond. Harmon Payne had a cloth dressing and carding 
machine there early in the century. It was used for awhile by Tim- 
othy Porter in the same business, and bone buttons were made 
there. It has disappeared. Rutter's leather factory (9) stands on 
the site of the first saw mill. This is the place where firearms 
were made by Ard Welton. It was owned for some years by Sher- 
man Bronson, and used for a button factory. This is the last privi- 
lege on the stream in Waterbury. Those in Wolcott will be found 
in Orcutt's " History." On a mere rivulet running into the east 
side of Rutter's pond, and near the house of Charles N. Frost, there 
was from 1820 to 1830 or later, a small water power utilized for a 
number of purposes at different times. There at one time horn 
and bone buttons were made in large quantities (see Volume 11, 
note on page 260). The property seems to have belonged to the 
Frost family, but the name of the button maker was Leverett Judd. 

GREAT BROOK. 

This stream enters the Naugatuck on the eastern side at the rail- 
road bridge near Holmes, Booth & Haydens. The first privilege was 
near the corner of Canal and Meadow streets (before Meadow street 
was opened). The factory (i) was reached by a lane which is now 
Canal street, which took its name from the canal leading to the fac- 
tory along this line. Lemuel Harrison or James Harrison had a 
small building here, spoken of as a "factory, so-called," about 1800. 
In 1 81 1 Orlando Porter conveyed a quarter interest in the shop to 
Zenas Cook, describing it as the new part of a clock shop (it had 
been partially destroyed by fire), and as standing on Lemuel Harri- 
son's land and owned in common by Lemuel Harrison, Daniel 



OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 587 

Clark, William Porter and said (3rlando Porter, doing business 
under the name of Lemuel Harrison & Co. The property passed 
into the hands of Harrison's creditors and was bought by David 
Prichard, who with his son, Elizur E., carried on the clock busi- 
ness there for a while. Later it was sold to E. E. Prichard, George 
Beecher, W. H. Merriman and W. H. Jones, and used as a button 
factory. It passed through many hands and uses, but was last used 
by the American Ring company under the management of Edward 
Chittenden. The water for the factory was taken from the brook 
on Grand street near South Main. In 1814 (2) a clock factory was 
built on the east side of South Main street between the present Jef- 
ferson and Union streets. The proprietors were Daniel Clark, 
Zenas Cook and William Porter. The water was taken from the 
brook at East Main street, carried in a ditch along the high land 
near the line of Spring street to a point below Jefferson street, and 
then across to the factory in a wooden trough. The enterprise was 
not successful. Buttons were afterward made there, but it was 
early converted into a dwelling house and was occupied and proba- 
bly owned by Ard Warner. On Brook street before it was opened 
was a concern (3) started by Leonard Prichard as a button factory 
about 1848, and afterward owned by Isaac E. Newton. It was used 
as a manufactory of sewing machine needles. The water was taken 
from about the same point as the one named above. It was aban- 
doned as a power about 1880. 

In the rear of the buildings on the north side of East Main street, 
near the present west line of Elm street (4), in the early years 
of the century, was a building used by James M. Cook and later 
by Mark Leavenworth and others for a clock factory. It after- 
ward passed into the hands of Anson Bronson, and was used by 
him for the manufacture of horn and bone buttons. It was next 
transferred to W. & A. Brown for making hooks and eyes. Its 
power was finally absorbed in that of the Mattatuck Manufacturing 
company, now Piatt Brothers. In 1848 the Mattatuck Manufacturing 
company (5) manufactured umbrella trimmings and cloth buttons. 
Its business was begun in the factory on Canal street and moved to 
the present site. The water is taken from the brook on Elm street 
near Kingsbury street, but is little used now for power. The site 
now occupied by the Matthews & Willard company (6) was origin- 
ally taken by H. Hotchkiss and others for a hook and eye factory 
(the first in Waterbury), conducted by John J. Hatch about 1835. 
Jared Pratt also manufactured cast brass andirons here. Hotch- 
kiss sold his interest to John Sandland, Sr. The property has 
changed hands many times, but is now owned by the Matthews & 



588 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

Willard company. The site of the Waterbnry Clock company (7) 
was one of the early saw mills of the town, owned by the Bronson 
family, the date not being- precisely known. Dr. Bronson thought 
it was the town's first saw mill, but as has been shown, this was an 
error. It remained a saw mill until bought by the Waterbury 
Knitting company in 1852. It then passed into the hands of Whit- 
tal, Lefevre & Co., the Great Brook company, Stocker & Co., and the 
Clock company. A mill that stood on the north side of Cherry 
street near the angle (8) was the site of an early fulling mill, Nathan 
Prindle's. Dr. Bronson fixes the date as 1727 or '28. Mark Leaven- 
worth owned and occupied the site many years as a clock factory 
and button factory. The property passed from his estate to the 
Knitting company, and the power was absorbed in theirs. It is 
possible that this is the site sequestered to Samuel Hickox, Jr., for 
a fulling mill in 1692. The Waterbury Manufacturing company's 
privilege (9) was established by J. M. L. & W. H. vScovill in 1849, for 
the luanufacture of german silver goods. This business was after- 
ward removed to Wallingford, and William R. Hitchcock & Co. 
occupied the factory for the manufacture of buttons, being suc- 
ceeded later by Hitchcock & Castle and the United States Button 
company. The small stone factory on Division street (10) was built 
by Edward Robinson about 1870 or a little earlier. It belongs to 
the estate of Henry C. Griggs. The privilege of the City mills, 
so-called (u), was established about 1850 by William Perkins. The 
reservoir was built mainly through the instrumentality of J. M. L. 
& W. H. Scovill for the benefit of the Waterbury Knitting company, 
but in part also for the other privileges on the stream. It was 
occupied by E. U. Lathro^D for a feed mill for some years, and since 
then by Maltby, Hopson & Brooks. About 1S20, Elias Clark and 
John Downs built a saw mill (12) nearly east of Clark's house, now 
Liebrecht's. Its remains were visible not long since, and probably 
are visible still. It was reached by a private way running from the 
Bucks Hill road near Clark's house to the Chestnut Hill road. 

LITTLE BROOK. 

This stream enters Great brook on the west side at the corner of 
South Main and Scovill streets. It turned the first wheel in town 
for strictly manufacturing purposes, that at James Harrison's clock 
shop, started in 1802, and standing near the corner of vSpencer ave- 
nue and North Main street on land leased of vStephen Bronson. 
A few rods above this. Colonel William Leavenworth had a dis- 
tillery (2), which passed into the possession of Joseph Burton, and 
so became Mrs. Willard Spencer's. William Perkins rented it for a 



OLD MILLS AND EABLT MANUFACTURES. 589 

carpenter's shop and put in a water wheel for sawing, etc., about 
1836. Willard Spencer and Ambrose Ives in 1839 made patent but- 
tons there. It was afterwards changed into a dwelling- and occupied 
by Mr. Spencer for several years. The site is now occupied by a 
frame dwelling next south of the brick block on the corner of 
North Main and King.sbury streets. 

BE.A.VER POND BROOK. 

This stream joins Mad river at the angle near the upper end of 
the Waterbury Brass company's East mill pond. Its privileges in- 
clude (i) a saw mill between the mouths of East Mountain and 
Turkey Hill brook, which was built by Benjamin Farrell about 
1826, and was used until about i860. Next (2) there was a small shop 
belonging to Thomas Payne and used for turning wooden bowls, 
etc., at about 1800. Then (3) there was an ancient saw mill, about 
which nothing beyond its existence and disappearance has been 
learned. All the above appear to have been below the entrance of 
Turkey Hill brook. Wedge's saw mill (4) was built about 1864-5. 
At the crossing of a road leading to Prospect, is a privilege (5) of 
some importance, in use before 1800, certainly one of the earliest 
manufacturing sites in the town. There Andrew Hoadley and An- 
drew H. Johnson made spinning-wheels and other articles of wood; 
there Amos Atwater had a grist mill; there Sala Todd made sim- 
ilar goods; there Enoch W. Frost made matches, and William Sizer 
some light metal goods, and Lambert Russell buttons. On the 
road from East Farms school-house south is a saw mill (6) built by 
Asa Hoadley and later owned by Joseph Moss. Near the plank 
road there is a privilege (7) used by Orrin Austin, about 1820, for 
a grist mill, and for parts of clocks. It has now gone to decay. 
There is a saw mill (8) of modern date on one of the upper tributa- 
ries, perhaps in the town of Prospect. 

TURKEY HILL BROOK. 

This stream comes into Beaver Pond brook not far from its 
mouth. There was a saw mill on it in the first half of the century, 
owned by Isaac Hotchkiss. Joseph Payne put up a small shop near 
the present city reservoir about fifteen years since, which was 
bought by the cit}^ 

SLED HALL BROOK. 

This stream enters the Naugatuck from the west near the hos]3i- 
tal. It drains Tamarack swamp, which sixty years ago was heavily 
wooded and jM'elded a very good flow of water. It is now cleared 



390 BISTORT OF WATEBBURY. 

and drained, and yields very little. (The writer thinks that the 
name of this brook is properly Sled "haul," and that it derived its 
name from the fact that there is a piece of still water in the Nauga- 
tiick near its mouth, which would freeze in winter and make a good 
place for crossing the river with sleds. It was just here that the 
hrst winter pioneers had their huts, and it is a fair inference that 
the name dates from that time; but this is conjectural.) When the 
place was small and the wind southwest, in the fall of the year, the 
sound of the stream as it came down the hill was loud and clear all 
through the village. It is a sound very distinctly associated in 
the minds of the older inhabitants with Indian summer weather, 
inoonlight nights, a clear crisp air and many pleasant memories. 
There was a saw mill on this brook a little east of the Town Plot 
road, not far from 1750. At one time, some years later, Captain 
Jacob Sperry had charge of it. He fell into the penstock and broke 
his leg. It was said that his cries were heard in town, and that 
people went from there to his relief. 

PARK BROOK. 

This stream enters the Naugatuck near the mouth of Steel's 
brook. The writer gives it this name as he knows of no other, and 
it comes from the north end of the " park." It was utilized by Aner 
Bradley as a power in connection with a plating shop, on the east 
side of the Watertown road, between i860 and 1870. 

steel's brook. 

The privileges of Steel's brook include Slade's mill (i) at Oak 
ville, which was built in 1854 by Joseph H. Baird. The site now 
owned by the Oakville company (2) is that of the oil mill referred to 
in a deed of 1807, from vStephen and Daniel Matthews to Mark 
Leavenworth, of 24 acres of land in the south part of Watertown, 
" with a fulling mill, carding machine and house on the same, and 
an old oil mill standing near on Joseph Woodruff's land, as reserved 
to us in our deed to said Woodruff." It was at this point probably 
that James Bishop had a saw mill and grist mill about 1830. Mer- 
riman & Warren afterward made webbing suspenders here, and it 
was temporarily occupied by several other persons. Near the upper 
Oakville factory (3) Seba Bronson had a grist mill, probably after 
he sold the Baird mill on the Naugatuck near the mouth of Han- 
cock's brook. About the time of his death (1829) General Gerrit 
Smith made pewter buttons here. It then went into the hands of 
Scovill & Buckingham, who made brass butts and other brass goods 



OLD MILLS AND EARLY MANUFACTURES. 



591 



here. From tliem it was transferred to the Oakville company. 
The Williams grist mill (4) near the old dam has been spoken of 
under " Grist Mills." Bennet Hickox built a saw mill (5) near the 
east end of the present Oakville dam, somewhere about 1850. It 
was used only a short time. The mill at Rockdale (6), where 
Wheeler & Wilson began their sewing machine business, now 
owned by vS. Smith & Son, seems to be the lineal descendant of a 
saw mill built by David Scott about 1725. In 1764, Nathaniel Arnold 
sold' to Abraham Norton a fulling mill privilege on Wooster brook. 
Probably it was at this point. Heminway's silk works (7) date 
from about 1845. There seems to have been no mill there before. 
Greenville (8), so-called, was the site of Jonathan Scott's saw mill 
in 1722-25. 

TURKEY BROOK. 

This stream comes into vSteel's brook at Oakville, and has a saw 
mill built by Samuel Copley about 1840. It was afterward owned 
by Eleazar Woodruff. It is now the property of F. C. Slade. 

HANCOCK BROOK. 

This stream joins the Naugatuck about half a mile l:)elow the 
village of Waterville. The first privilege is the one at Waterville 
(i), the history of which is given in Volume II, page 29. About 
half a mile up the brook is an old saw mill site (2) established about 
1750 by one vScott. It was owned for many years by David Downs, 
and later passed into the possession of Joseph Welton. A wooden 
building was added twenty-five years since, which has been used by 
Lewis Garrigus for woodwork and by the Tucker company for the 
manufacture of brass nails. The "falls" (3) at Hoadley's (or Grey- 
stone) are within the boundaries of Plymouth. Amos Hickox, 
and afterward Abraham Hickox, had a saw mill here in the last 
century. Calvin Hoadley, later, had a grist mill here. About 
1S08 Silas Hoadley, at first with E. Terry and S. Thomas, after- 
ward by hiinself, began to make clocks, and continued the manu- 
facture with fair success for many years. It has since been used 
for the manufacture of cutlery and other small wares. Knouse & 
AUender were the last occupants. 



CHAPTER XXXIX. 

THE INTEREST OF EARLY CONNECTICUT IN EDUCATION AIMS OF THE 

COLONISTS FIRST SCHOOLS IN THE TOWN CHANGES IN THE 

SCHOOL SYSTEM SCHOOLS AWAY FRO-M THE CENTRE SCHOOL- 
HOUSES INCOME FROM SCHOOL LANDS; THREE DISTINCT SOURCES 

CONDITION OF THINGS AT THE END OF THE COLONIAL PERIOD 

PROVISION FOR GRAMMAR SCHOOLS THE FIRST WATERBURY 

ACADEMY THE ERECTION OF A BUILDING TWO SCHOOLS IN IT 

TEACHERS PROSPERITY AND DECLINE REMOVALS OF THE 

BUILDING ITS LATER HISTORY. 

IN the early days none of the colonies showed greater apprecia- 
tion of educational advantages than Connecticut. It was nat- 
ural that communities boasting such men as John "Winthrop at 
New London, John Davenport at New Haven and Roger Ludlowe 
at Hartford should be zealous in furthering the cause of education, 
and it is said that in no case did a settlement defer the establish- 
ing of a school until the second year of its existence. As early as 

1641 we find that the General Court of New Haven colony ordered 
"that a free school should be set up"; and the Hartford records of 

1642 mention an appropriation of ^30 a year to the town schools, also 
a decree that the schoohnaster shall be "a scholar, no common man, 
a gentleman," and two years later the General Court enacted that 
every township containing fifty householders should "appoint one 
within their town to teach all such childern as shall resort to him 
to read and write, whose wages shall be paid either by the parents 
or masters of such children, or by the inhabitants in general," while 
any township containing a hundred or more families was enjoined 
to "set up a grammar school." The stringent rules in reference to 
education found in Roger Ludlowe's Connecticut code of 1650, are 
of great interest. This code, which is almost identical with that 
enacted by the General Court of Massachusetts in 1642, decreed as 
follows: 

Forasmuch as the good education of children is of singular behoof and benefit to 
any commonwealth, and, whereas many parents and masters are too indulgent and 
negligent of their duty in that kind; it is therefore ordered by this court and author- 
ity thereof, that the selectmen of every town, in the several precincts and quarters 
where they dwell, shall have a vigilant eye over their brethren and neighbors, to see, 
first, that none of them shall suffer so much barbarism in any of their families as 
not to endeavor to teach by themselves or others their children and apprentices so 



THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIBST ACADEMY. 593 

much learning as may enable them perfectly to read the English tongue, and knowl- 
edge of the capital laws, upon penalty of twenty shillings for each neglect therein; 
also that all masters of families do once a week at least, catechise their children and 
servants in the grounds and principles of religion. 

Moreover provision was therein made even for the religious instruc- 
tion of the Indians. 

There are those perhaps who look upon compulsory education 
as a novelty, but these laws of the early fathers were as strict as 
those of to-day, while extending in addition over the domain of 
religion. It is on record that the schools were established to pre- 
vent "that one chief project of that old deluder, Satan, to keep 
men from the knowledge of the Scriptures, . . . and that learn- 
ing may not be buried in the grave of our forefathers, in church 
and commonwealth, — the Lord assisting our endeavors." The deep 
sense felt by our forefathers of the importance of education is 
illustrated by another law which provides that such as shall " apply 
themselves to due use of means for the attainment of learning" 
shall be free from "payment of rates with respect to their per- 
sons," — the immunity from taxation to last only so long as the 
studying should continue; and this is even more clearly demon- 
strated by the fact that when the project of founding a college in this 
section of the country seemed impracticable, the Connecticut and 
New Haven colonists generously aided the little college struggling 
along at Cambridge, Mass., by a voluntary contribution, made by 
each family, of "a peck of corn, or twelve pence money," towards 
the maintenance of poor scholars therein. In the statutes of 1702 
the same provisions as the preceding are retained, with the addi- 
tion of an annual tax of forty shillings on every thousand pounds 
in the grand list, to be distributed among those towns only which 
maintained their schools according to law. 

With various modifications in regard to details the same objects 
were steadily pursued throughout the colony, namely, the mainte- 
nance, first, of an elementary school in every neighborhood con- 
taining a sufiicient number of children; secondly, of a Latin school 
in every large town; thirdly, of a college for the higher culture of 
the whole colony. There is no reason to doubt that the same pro- 
gressive spirit prevailed in Waterbury as in the other settlements. 
Although the first reference to schools, in the town records, occurs 
as late as 1698 (see page 248), it is probable that a school, taught by 
the younger Jeremiah Peck, had been established fully ten years 
before that date. We find that in 1699 the town granted thirty 
shillings and the "school money" for the encouragement of a 
school for three months. In 1702 two committees were appointed, 
3S 



2^4 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

one to engag-e a schoolmaster to teach school for three months, and 
the other to "hire a school dame for to keep school in the summer, 
and for that end to make use of what money shall be left that is 
due to the school for the school lands, after the schoolmaster is 
paid." Two years later the records state that Isaac Bronson and 
Benjamin Barnes were chosen a committee to "hire a schoolmaster 
to instruct in wrighting and reeding," and to have what the coun- 
try (the colony) allows for that end, also to engage a dame for the 
summer school, renting the school lands at some public meeting, to 
provide funds for that purpose. The first mention of a school 
building appears December 8, 1707, when a committee was chosen 
to "see after the building of a school-house which the town by vote 
passed to be built." At what time this vote had passed does not 
appear, but two years later (December 28, 1709) the same commit- 
tee was reappointed to "carry on the work of building a school- 
house in the town," whence we may infer either that the building 
had not been begun, or that the work had dragged on from year to 
year. 

Up to this point the management of school matters had been 
entirely conducted at town meetings. But events were so shaping 
themselves that a change of some kind was inevitable. As a set- 
tlement grew in size and population, the assembling of all the chil- 
dren at one point for instruction became impracticable. We find 
this fact recognized in an act of the General Court passed in 1712 
by which the parishes or ecclesiastical societies were constituted 
school districts, the management of the schools, however, still 
remaining in the hands of the town. The act of the General Court 
was as follows: 

All parishes which are already made, or shall hereafter be made by this Assem- 
bly shall have for the bringing up of their children and maintenance of a school 
in some fixed place the forty shillings in every ^1000 arising in the list of estates 
within the parish. 

By a natural modification the authority vested in the towns was 
gradually transferred to the ecclesiastical societies, and we find a 
later act in which not only is this implied, but a further advance 
indicated in the establishment of "school societies." This act 
decrees that "all inhabitants living within the limits of ecclesiasti- 
cal societies incorporated by law shall constitute school societies, 
and shall annually meet some time in the months of September, 
October or November." 

These changes, which had taken place in the first years of the 
eighteenth century in the older towns, occurred in Waterbury 
somewhat later. The old school-house at the centre, which up to 



THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIRST ACADEMY. 595 

this time had answered all the requirements of the town, had been 
repaired in 1720, and three years afterward the town voted that the 
school committee should "yearly demand the country money," the 
money required to be raised by the colony laws of 17 12, "and also 
the money which the school land was let for, and pay for the school 
in this way." It was also voted that the committee should annu- 
ally make report of their receipts and disbursements at the great 
town meeting, and that this annual report should be put upon the 
pages of the records. From the report of the committee thus 
appointed it appears that their receipts for the year were ^6 9s, 
and that their disbursement to the school amounted to the same 
sum, and that there was coming to the town "twenty-five shillings 
in Dr. Warner's hand, and seven shillings and six pence in Richard 
Welton's hand," for school lands which they had hired. "These 
votes and memoranda of the town clerk " says Bronson in his 
"History" (page 236) "prove the earnest endeavors of the early 
people of Waterbury, in a time of great embarrassment, to provide 
a means of elementary education for the young." 

Although the original limits of Mattatuck included eight towns 
and parts of towns, the population as late as 17 12 centred closely 
around the Green. As time went on and little settlements were 
established at points remote from the centre, "each neighborhood 
that would keep up a school, and had a sufficent number of scholars, 
was allowed a proportion of the school money."* From the records 
it would appear that in 1730 there were settlements, with a sufficient 
number of inhabitants to justify the establishment of schools, at 
Judd's Meadow (now Naugatuck), Wooster Swamp (now Water- 
town), and Bucks Hill. It was voted, December 10, 1734, that a 
school be kept during the whole year following, as the law directs; 
seven months at the centre, nine weeks at Wooster Swamp, and 
seven weeks at Judd's Meadow. In 1737 the vote was that the 
school should be kept twenty-one weeks at the centre, twelve weeks 
at Wooster society, six weeks up the river, that is, at Plymouth, six 
weeks at Judd's Meadow, and three weeks at Bucks Hill, the num- 
ber of weeks being proportional to the number of scholars. The 
same master taught all the schools, going from place to place for 
this purpose. 

In February, 1730, an attempt was made in Waterbury to secure 
a new school-house, but the project was voted down in town meet- 
ing. In December of the same year it was voted to " build a school- 
house on the meeting-house green where the old house stood," but 
the fathers exercised a wise man's privilege, and within a few days 



* For the earliest notices of outside scliools see Bronson, p. 237. 



596 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



the decision was reversed. We can learn nothing- more on the sub- 
ject until 1743, when we find that the town " granted liberty to set 
a new school-house where the old house stood." 

From references already made to the early records it has been 
seen that certain lands were set apart for school uses. It is impor- 
tant to distinguish accurately in regard to the three kinds of school 
land, so-called, whence the money for the support of the schools of 
Waterbury was derived. 

There was, first, the land known as the " school lots," which had been set aside 
by the early proprietors for the purpose of leasing. This land was valued at ^150, 
and the income from it was to be employed for the benefit of the town schools. For 
a number of years this land was rented and the money disposed of by the town, 
the funds being sometimes misappropriated and used for public objects other than 
educational. The care of it occasioned some trouble and expense at various times, 
and it was at length thought best to devise some means of disposing of it legally 
and profitably. A committee appointed for the purpose of considering this matter 
reported, December 10, 1734. recommending that the school lots be sold at auction 
at some public place, the money thus obtained to be " converted to the use of 
the schools." The sales commenced almost immediately, and this excellent plan 
was duly carried out. (See pages 333, 334.) 

At the time when the respective claims of Hartford and Windsor were adjusted, 
the colony had obtained possession of seven townships in the western part of Litch- 
field county. In 1733 these townships were sold, and the proceeds of the sale 
added to the local school fund of the towns and societies of the colony. In Water- 
bury the First society claimed for itself alone the entire portion of this fund accru- 
ing to the town, basing its claim upon the fact that it was the only society in exist- 
ence in the town at the time of the passing of the law. It was not until after 
several years of discussion and wranglings that a vote was passed (in 1770) decree- 
ing that thenceforward the moneys should be divided among the several societies, 
and parts of societies in the town, both those then established and those hereafter 
to be brought into existence. The controversies and lawsuits which began when 
the new societies were made independent towns, combined with bad management, 
put an end to the dispute by dissipating the money.* 

The third source of revenue was the sale of Western territories belonging to the 
state. In 1773 Connecticut formed a township, on the Susquehanna, called West- 
moreland, extending indefinitely to the westward, which was annexed to Litchfield. 
In 1786 Connecticut ceded this Western territory to the Federal union, reserving 
the tract on the southern shore of Lake Erie, still known as the Western Reserve. 
As Litchfield county resigned all claim to the town of Westmoreland, congress 
recognized the right of the state to this territory, which embraced an area of 
4,000,000 acres. Of this immense area, a section measuring a half million acres 
was granted to citizens whose property had been destroyed by fire or otherwise 
during the Revolutionary war (whence the name Fire lands) and the remainder was 

* For further details see Bronson's " History," pp. 240-242. The following receipt, the original auto- 
graph of which is preserved among the papers of the First Congregational society, may be regarded as a 
souvenir of this period of dissension : 

" Reed. March 12th, 1795, of Capt. Saml. Judd and Capt. Benjn. Upson, by the hands of Richard Bryan, 
seven pounds one shilling on part of an Execution in favor of John Woodruff, etc., against them and others 
as committees of the several Ecclesiastical Societies in Waterbury, obtained at Litchfield Superior Court, 
January term, 1795. — William Hillhouse." 



THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIRST ACADEMY. 597 

sold in 1795 for $1,200,000, the proceeds being added to tlie state school fund. Con- 
necticut in iSoo ceded her right of jurisdiction over the reserve to the United States, 
and in the same year ceased, as a state, to control the fund. By an act of the legis- 
lature, the care of the fund was committed to James Hillhouse, under whose wise 
management it steadily increased. The proceeds of this fund are distributed 
annually to the various towns of the state, and it is this money, in addition to the 
school tax, which places the schools of Connecticut upon so favorable a basis. 

The condition of the educational system in Connecticut at the 
close of the colonial period has been described by Noah Webster as 
follows: 

The law of Connecticut ordains that every town or parish containing seventy 
householders shall keep an English school at least eleven months in the year, and 
towns containing a less number at least six months. Everj'- town keeping public 
school is entitled to draw from the treasury of the state a certain sum of money 
proportional to its census on the list of property, the deficiency, when any occurs, 
being raised by a tax. To extend the benefit of this establishment to all the inhab- 
itants, large towns and parishes are divided into districts, each of which is supposed 
to be able to furnish a competent number of scholars for one school. In each district 
a house is erected for the purpose by the inhabitants of that district, who hire a mas- 
ter, furnish wood and tax themselves to pay all expenses not provided for by the 
public money. In this manner every child in the whole state has access to a 
school. The school is kept during the winter months, when every farmer can 
spare his sons. In the summer a woman is hired to teach small children who are 
not fit for any kind of labor. In the large towns scholars either public or private 
are kej^t the whole year, and in every county town a grammar school is established 
by law. 

From this closing sentence of Noah Webster's statement it 
appears that the enactment of 1644 had been carried out, or at any 
rate was still recognized as in force at the close of the colonial 
period. As a matter of fact, it was found impracticable at first to 
enforce the requirement; but by 1672 grammar schools, or, as they 
were frequently called, Latin schools, were established in the chief 
towns of each county, and these were supported in part by grants 
of public lands, and sometimes by individual endowments. By 
degrees, when there was difficulty in establishing the local grammar 
school, as part of the public system, it becaine common for the 
clergyman of the town to fit 3'oung men for college, or for a college 
graduate to open at his own risk a place of instruction for those 
whose parents desired them to pursue a more advanced course of 
study than the district school could provide. In such cases, if there 
were a few men of public spirit and energy to encourage the under- 
taking, an academic institution would be established sooner or 
later, supported in some instances by private bequests and in others 
by corporate powers and grants of public lands obtained from the 
legislature. Thus it was that the first Waterbury Academy came 
into existence. 



598 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

THE FIRST ACADEMY. 

Until the year 1784, there was no school in Waterbury of a 
higher grade than the common or district school. About this time, 
however, the Rev. Joseph Badger opened a school for girls. Its 
success awakened among the people of the town a desire for a 
school of the first class for both sexes, with a suitable building. A 
subscription was started, and a building, to be forty feet long, twenty 
feet wide, two stories high, with gambrel roof, two dormer windows 
on each side, and a chimney at each end, was commenced on the 
south side of the "Green," opposite to where the City hall now 
stands. It is not known whether the cupola was built at this time 
or later. The promoters of the building failed to receive money 
enough to finish it, and it seemed as if the plan must be abandoned, 
when Stephen Bronson, Benjamin Upson, Dr. Isaac Baldwin and 
John Curtiss came forward with the proposal that they would finish 
the building, on condition that they should have control of it until 
the money was refunded. This offer was accepted, and the build- 
ing, when completed in the fall of 1785, presented a quite impos- 
ing appearance. Two schools were opened, one for girls on the 
first floor, under the care of Mr. Badger, and one for boys up stairs, 
under the care of David Hale, a brother of Captain Nathan Hale of 
Revolutionary memory. Jeremiah Day, afterward president of 
Yale college, and Bennet Bronson, afterward Judge Bronson, were 
among his pupils. For a time scholars came in from adjoining 
towns to attend the schools, which were very prosperous. The first 
winter there were 150 pupils. The next year John Kingsbury, 
who had just graduated from college, joined the corps of teachers, 
and remained connected with the school until 1788 or '89, when he 
went to Litchfield to pursue his law studies. We do not know how 
long David Hale remained with the school, but his name used to be 
mentioned frequently by the old inhabitants during the first quarter 
of the present century, and he seems to have been a teacher of 
great ability and popularity. Mr. Badger remained with the school 
two years, that is, until 1787, at which time he accepted a call to 
Blandford, Mass., and there remained until i8oo, when he became 
a pioneer home missionary at the west. It is recorded of him that 
he was a brave man, who, before entering college, had be-n a sol- 
dier in the Revolution, and that in the war of 1812, while nominally 
a chaplain, he had rendered great service to General Harrison as a 
guide and assistant. Throughout his life he was very poor, and in 
his later years depended mainly upon his Revolutionary pension for 
support. He died in 1846. 



THE EARLY SCHOOLS AND THE FIRST ACADEMY. 599 

These three, Badger, Hale and Kingsbury, are the only teachers 
that can be named of those who served while the academy stood 
upon the Green. It appears that the school, in the height of its 
prosperity, was furnished with the first bell ever brought into the 
town. At first, as there was no cupola on the school-house, it was 
hung in a willow tree near by, where it served not only to call the 
children to school, but also to summon the people to worship on the 
Sabbath. Charles D. Kingsbury, who died in 1890 at the age of 
ninety-four, said that he remembered the tower on the building 
after it stood on West Main street, and that it was circular in form, 
with supporting pillars six or eight feet high. 

The prosperity of the school, which was so great that both 
stories of the building were filled with scholars, did not continue 
long after the departure of the teachers already named; at all 
events it appears that about 1790 James Harrison was making 
clocks in the lower story of the building.* It was probably between 
that time and 1800 that it was removed to a lot on West ^Slain street, 
near where Central avenue now is. Its removal was brought about 
in an amusing way. At a meeting of the officers of the militia 
regiment, which was held at Captain vSamuel Judd's tavern, prob- 
ably prior to the year 1807, to prepare for the annual "general 
training," the question arose where the general muster should be 
held. Some urged that it should not be held in Waterbury, as 
there was no good place in which to parade and perform evolutions. 
Captain Judd being present, or hearing of the discussion at the 
time, said, "I'll tell you what to do; move that school-house over to 
the corner of my lot, and then there will be room enough." The 
idea met with general approval, and in a short time the building 
was removed, the order of transfer being given by Colonel William 
Leavenworth, and the way prepared for holding the general train- 
ing on the Green. After the removal the building became the 
school-house of the West Centre district; the upper room was used 
for the school, the lower for religious purposes, town meetings, 
singing schools, etc. It also served as Town hall, until about 1807, 
when, as it became necessary to make repairs, the two stories were 
thrown into one, the cupola was taken down, and the bell hung 
under the roof. A division was made into two rooms, separated by 
a swinging partition, which on account of its weight was divided 
into two parts. This could at any time be swung up, and both 
rooms thrown into one. On the south side of the partition was a 
door for a passage between the two rooms. The east room was 

♦Judging from the charges entered in his booI<s, he made two clocks per month, at a price of about £^ 
each. 



6oo HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

occupied by the district school of the West Centre district, and the 
west was sometimes used for a priv'ate school, though it appears 
that after the "stone academy" was built in 1825, the west room 
was used exclusively as a cloak room and a play room for the 
children. By a vote of the district, the bell in the old building was 
removed to the belfry in the new academy. The district school was 
held most of the time in the old academy building until about 1836, 
when, as it would no longer answer for a school without consider- 
able repairs, the district sold it at auction to Samuel J. Holmes for 
about forty dollars. It was then moved back from the sidewalk 
and altered into a dwelling-house. In the summer of 1878 it was 
transferred about 400 feet to the northwest, into a vacant lot, to 
make way for the laying out of Central avenue. Thus the old aca- 
demy survived four removals. The main timbers, which are of 
white oak, ten inches square, are still in a good state of preserva- 
tion. 

Among those who taught when the building was on West Main 
street are the following: 

Ashley Scott, Samuel Root, Ira Hotchkiss of Navigatuck, a Mr. Porter, the Rev. 
Mr. Williams, the Rev. Virgil H. Barboi:r, John Clark, Elijah F. Merrill, Israel 
Holmes (ist), Phebe Hotchkiss (a sister of Deacon Elijah Hotchkiss), a sister of 
Phebe Hotchkiss, whose name is not known, Miss Warner of Plymouth, Elmer 
Clark of Bucks Hill, Mr. Peck of Watertown, Mr. Robinson, Miss Norton (after- 
ward married in New Milford), David Trumbull Bishop, Janet Judd (afterward 
married to a Mr. Beers of Watertown), Harriet Powell, Julia Upson "of Southing- 
ton (afterward married to Joseph Rogers of East Haven), and Phebe Bronson 
(afterward married to Dr. William A. Alcott, the author). The last teacher was a 
Miss Clark of Middlebury. 

Great sacrifices were undoubtedly made to erect this academy 
building. The population, including Plymouth, Watertown, Mid- 
dlebury, part of Oxford, Naugatuck, Prospect and Wolcott, did not 
exceed three thousand, and the amount in the " grand list " of 1786 
was only ^17,000, or $60,000 as money was then rated. It was as 
great an undertaking to erect and equip this building as it would 
be for the Waterbury of to-day, with its present population and 
wealth, to erect one costing $500,000. If we had no other evidence, 
we could safely infer from the churches and school-houses of a cen- 
tury ago, and from the instructors who labored in them, that the 
forefathers were sterling men, men who believed in education and 
religion, and were willing to deny themselves, that knowledge and 
righteousness might be advanced in the community. 



CHAPTER XL. 

SABBATH-KEEPING AND SUMPTUARY LAWS THE EARLIEST CONNECTICUT 

CHURCHES TOWN AND CHURCH IN MATTATUCK JEREMIAH PECK, 

JOHN SOUTHMAYD, MARK LEAVENWORTH THE " GREAT AWAKEN- 
ING " THE REVOLUTION MR. LEAVENWORTH's CHARACTER 

THREE MEETING-HOUSES — THE EARLY CREED DECLENSION AFTER 

WAR EDWARD PORTER, HOLLAND WEEKS, LUKE WOOD — REVIVAL 

UNDER NETTLETON ORIGIN OF PRAYER-MEETING, OF SUNDAY 

SCHOOL DANIEL CRANE A CHRONICLE SALEM SOCIETY A 

CHURCH AND A MEETING-HOUSE DEACON HOTCHKISs's ACCOUNT 

BOOK GIFTS OF LAND REMOVAL TO THE VALLEY MINISTERS 

AND DEACONS. 

THE absence of any very early legislation in Connecticut Col- 
ony concerning- the Sabbath is an evidence of the deep and 
wide-spread observance of its sancity in the lives and hearts 
of the colonists. For more than thirty years no allusion was made 
touching the possibility that the Sabbath could be desecrated by 
the people, and a similar absence of written law in regard to it is 
found in the early records of Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay. 
The Indians were the first apparent offenders. Tn 1666 it was 
ordered that whatever Indian or Indians should labor or play on 
the Sabbath within the English limits, or on the English lands, 
should pay a fine of five shillings, or sit in the stocks one hour. 

The evil was evidently growing, for in 1668 it was ordered that 
if any person should " prophane the vSabbath by unnecessary travel 
or playing, or should keep out of the meeting-house during the public 
worship unnecessarily, if there was convenient room in the house," 
the offender should meet the same penalties that had fallen upon 
the Indian. It was not until 1676 that the order came requiring 
any person either on Saturday night or on the Lord's Day night, 
though it should be after the sun had set, who was " found sporting 
in the streets or fields, or drinking in houses of public entertain- 
ment, or elsewhere unless for necessity, to pay ten shillings for 
every such transgression or suffer corporal punishment for default 
of due payment." Servile work on the Sabbath was forbidden at 
the same date. It was defined as " works not of piety, charity or 
necessity." " Prophane discourse or talk, rude or unreverent be- 
havior," were not to be permitted on that holy day, and if it so 



6o2 HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 

happened that the offence was " circumstanced with hig'h handed 
presumption," the judge had power given him to augment the 
penalty. 

In 1676 "God's worship and the homage due to him" required 
"reading of the Scripture, cattechizing of chiklren, and dayly prayer 
with giving of thanks to be attended to by every Christian family," 
and the neglect of those obligations was declared by the law to be 
a great sin, " provoaking to God to power forth wrath on such fam- 
alayes or persons," and the Court solemnly advised the ministry in 
all places " to look into the state of such families, convince them, 
and instruct them in their duty, and encourage them to perform it," 
and advised the townsmen to " assist the ministry to reform and 
educate the children in g-ood literature and the knowledge of the 
Scripture." If any g-overnors of families proved obstinate and 
would not be reformed, the grand jury presented such persons to 
the county court, to be fined, punished, or bound to good behavior. 
All persons were forbidden to make, or wear, or buy any apparel 
exceeding the quality and condition of their persons or estates, and 
any tailor who fashioned any garment for any child or servant, con- 
trary to the mind of the parent or master, was compelled to pay ten 
shillings for his offence. Excess in apparel was, at the same time, 
declared unbecoming a wilderness condition and the profession of 
the gospel, and it was ordered that "what person soever should 
wear gold or silver lace, or gold c r silver buttons, silk ribbons, or 
other superfluous trimings, or any bone lace above three shillings 
per yard, or silk scarfs," should be assessed to pay rates on an estate 
of ;3^i5o, — the same amount that men were accustomed to pay to 
whom .such apparel was allowed, as being suitable to their rank. Ex- 
ceptions were made in favor of magistrates, public officers of the 
colony, their wives or children, and of settled military commissioned 
officers, and also of those persons whose cpiality and estate had been 
above the ordinary degree, although then "decayed." 

The above laws were in full force and effect in 1681 when the 
planters of Waterbury assembled their families around the Green. 

The "most auncient towne " in Connecticut is Wethersfield. It 
was so determined by the General Court as early as 1650, and the 
statement is incorporated in the "code of laws" of that year. 
In that most ancient town — then known as Watertown — the first 
church of Christ in Connecticut was organized. On May 29, 1635, 
the church in Watertown in Massachusetts Bay granted "a dismis- 
sion " to six of its members, "with the intent that the six men 
should form anew in church covenant on the River of Connecticut." 
The names of the six members were: "Andrew Ward, John Sher- 



THE FIRST (JHURCH TO 1825. 603 

man, John Strickland, Robert Coe, Robert Re3'nold, and Jonas 
Weede." In April, 1636, the first court of which we have record in 
Connecticut Colony was held at Newtown (now Hartford), and 
before it the six men presented "a certificate that they had formed 
anew in church covenant with the public allowance of the rest of 
the members of the said churches." The "said churches " were 
undoubtedly those of Newtown and Dorchester (Hartford and 
Windsor) — which churches had removed, as churches, from the Bay 
to the Connecticut river. 

The second and third churches, those of New Haven and Mil- 
ford, were formed August 22, 1639 — that at New Haven by the 
appointment of twelve men chosen by the freemen, who out of the 
twelve men thus chosen did select seven of their number to begin 
the church. By the covenanting together of the seven men and 
their reception of other men into their fellowship, the church was 
gathered. In like manner in 1652, the Farmington church was 
established with its "seven pillars." Two of the seven men, many 
years later, were personally interested in the settlement of our 
township (see p. 148). 

What minister first preached in Waterbury we do not know, but 
it seems almost safe to say that it was the Rev. Samuel Hooker (see 
p. 159), for what could have been more natural than that his love 
for the more than thirty members of his Farmington church should 
have led him to visit Mattatuck, whither they had removed, and 
minister to their spiritual comfort in the wilderness. 

As early as 1679 Mattatuck was one of two "newly begun"' set- 
tlements within the colony, who were seeking for a minister (see p. 
184). In February of 1681, or as soon as the majority of the plant- 
ers were living here, the c^uestion arose concerning the lot that 
should be for the minister's use, which question involves the proba- 
ble presence of a minister to use it. That the colony, through its 
committee, was vigorously interested in procuring a settled minis- 
ter, certainly as early as 1683, appears from the "Diary of the Rev. 
Noadiah Russell," tutor at Harvard in 1682. Early in 1683, he wrote: 
"I received a letter from Major Talcott of Hartford, in behalf of 
Mattatuck, to invite me to be their minister, which I answered neg- 
atively." Major Talcott doubtless met with many similar disap- 
pointments in his efforts, for during the ensuing six years there 
has not been found on record the name of a minister in connection 
with the people of Mattatuck. Nevertheless, that there had been 
a minister appears again from an item in the town records of 16S6, 
when the question came before the town concerning the lot that 
s'hoVildhQ and remain iov the minister's use, and there is sufficient 



6o4 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

evidence to warrant the belief that Mr. John Frayser was in Water- 
bury, and living in the house that had been built for him, and that 
he served the people as their pastor during- a part if not the whole 
of the period between 1684 and 1689 (see p. 210). 

The history of the town and the history of the First church, from 
the beginning down to October, 1738, are so blended, that their sep- 
arate estates cannot be defined. The story of the invitation sent 
to the Rev. Jeremiah Peck to become the settled minister here; the 
pledge given by twenty-five men of Waterbury concerning his sal- 
ary; the town's unanimous action in presenting house and lands to 
Mr. Peck and gifts to his sons; the escort provided to transport him 
from Greenwich here; the events of the year in which he came; the 
reasons why he could not baptize the children of his people until 
he became an ordained minister over the Waterbury church; the 
known events of his life, together with the petition to the General 
Court by some of the inhabitants of Waterbury for permission to 
"proceed to the gathering of a Congregational church"; the court's 
happy response, and all that we know concerning the most impor- 
tant event that ever took place within the Naugatuck valley — the 
organization of the First church of Waterbury — together with the 
story of the efforts of the people to build a meeting-house under 
adverse environment, have been so fully given between pages 210 
and 233 as to make their repetition here unnecessary. 

Mr. Peck was sixty-seven years old when he came to undertake 
the organisation of a church in a territory but fifteen years out of 
wilderness-estate — a task of no small dimensions even to a young 
and vigorous man. Having been born in the city of London, Eng- 
land, or its vicinity, in 1623, Mr. Peck came, with his father, to this 
country when a boy of fourteen years. Before 1660 he was preach- 
ing, or teaching school, in Guilford. In that year he was invited to 
take charge of the collegiate school at New Haven, which was a 
colony school instituted by the General Court in 1659. In 1661 he 
was invited to preach at Saybrook, and was there settled as a min- 
ister. In 1666, early in the year, he removed to Guilford. Together 
with certain other ministers and churches in the New Haven and 
Connecticut colonies, Mr. Peck is said to have been decidedly 
opposed to the " half-way covenant " adopted by the General Synod 
of 1662, and to the union of the two colonies under the charter of 
Charles II, — which union was effected in 1665. vSo great was the 
discontent of Mr. Peck and others that they resolved to emigrate 
from the colony. Removing from Guilford in 1666, he became one 
of the first settlers of Newark, N. J. He preached to the neighbor- 
ing people of Elizabethtown and settled there, as their first minis- 



THE FIRST CUURCH TO 1825. 605 

' ter, in 1669 or 1670. In 1670, and again in 1675, he was invited 
by the people of Woodbridge, N. J., and in 1676 by the peo- 
ple of Greenwich (Conn.), to settle with them in the minis- 
try, but he declined these several invitations. The invitation to 
Greenwich was repeated two years later, and he had a similar 
call from Newtown on Long Island. Late in the autumn of 1678 
he became the first settled minister in Greenwich, where he re- 
mained (despite at least one urgent " call " — to Barnstable, Mass.) 
until his removal to Waterbury, in 1689. He is said to have 
refused to baptize the children of non-communicants, at Green- 
wich, in 1688.* 

It will be readily understood that Mr. Peck's life and energies 
must have been well-nigh spent when he came to his final pastorate. 
A review of the events that occurred between the date of his arrival 
and the organization of the church will give convincing proof that 
his work here was not less trying than in any one of the frontier 
towns where he had served, and he seems to have fallen before the 
burden of it. We learn that "some years " before his death he was 
" disenabled from the work of the ministry by a fit of the appoplex " 
(see p. 229). Accordingly, we find that but four years after the 
church was organized and Mr. Peck was ordained as its pastor, 
another minister is mentioned as the "present minister," and in 1696 
that the children of Waterbury were taken elsewhere for the rite of 
baptism. 

Mr. Peck's will (in the form of a deed of gift) is recorded at 
page 6 of Volume I of Waterbury Land Records. It is a long and 
interesting document, dated January 14, 1696, and acknowledged 
the next June (1697). It affords abundant evidence of an ample 
estate. Mr. Peck still held forty acres of upland and ten of meadow 
in the town of Greenwich " in a place called Biram," and a two- 
hundred acre farm which had been given him by the General Court, 
besides his numerous holdmgs in Waterbury lands. He bestowed 
all his "husbandry tools, as carts, plows, axes, hoes, chains, or other 
implements," with "all the stock, horses, oxen, cows, sheep and 
swine," without enumerating them. He left to his wife "all his 
movables within doors, excepting a silver tankard," which he gave 
to his son Jeremiah, f 

*See "A Genealogical Account of the Descendants of William Peck of New Haven, Conn. By Darius 
Peck of Hudson, N. Y." 

+ Mrs. Joanna Peck executed a will in the form of a deed of gift, October 7, 1706, leaving all her estate 
to her sons, Jeremiah and Joshua, except that she gave to her daughter Anna, "a wainscot cupboard, the great 
table, the biggest pewter platter, and the choice of two more platters;" to Anna's daughter, " the draw box 
and a two-year-old heifer;" to Jeremiah's daughter (Johannah, then eighteen months old), the brass pan. 

For other items relating to Mr. Peck's will, and to his last days, see pp. 233 to 235; also "The Churches 
of Mattatuck," pp. 173 to 183. 



6o6 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

The following-, from "The Churches of Mattatuck " (pages 184, 
185) is descriptive of this period: 

In the year 1(199, and before the death of Mr. Peck, this church received the 
ministrations of a young man who became the most learned and distinguished 
lawyer in New England. When he came to Waterbury he was fresh from Harvard 
college. It is pleasing to know that this people appreciated the ability of the Rev. 
John Read before opportunity had been given him Lo prove it elsewhere. He made 
a deep impression. The town was stirred to activity. There was a determination 
and an earnestness in its efforts to secure Mr. Read "for the work of the min- 
istry " that the years have not obliterated from the records. It is almost pathetic 
to read of the inducements offered by a people whose ratable estate was but ^1700, 
and the number of whose taxable citizens was but forty-seven. He was offered ^^50 
by the year in provision pay, .^10 in wood and ^20 in labor, in the same year that 
the salary of the governor of the colony was but ^120 in provision pay. It must be 
remembered that this town, as a town, was less than fourteen years old, and that 
less than forty men had built one house for the minister, in which his life (for he 
was an invalid) was drawing to its close. Undaunted by the magnitude of the 
undertaking, the town promised to build a new house for Mr. Read. It was to be 
thirty-eight feet long, nineteen feet wide; to have two chimneys from the ground, 
and, apparently, a chamber chimney. The town agreed to " dig and stone a cellar, 
clapboard the house and shingle it, and make one end of it fat to live in." As a 
present gift, independent of the towns action, the proprietors gave him ten acres 
of upland. Yet more was there in the heart of this generous people to do for him. 
After he had been ordained two years the house and the house lot of two acres at 
the southwest corner of West Main and Willow streets, with a ^150 propriety, was 
to be his own. Negotiations went on. From time to time another persuasive voice 
was added to the committee, to entreat Mr. Read to dwell here, but, at last, as 
winter was drawing near, Mr. Read drew away, lor the old record bears witness to 
the fact in these words: " Deacon Thomas Judd was chosen a committee to 
endeavor by himself and the best counsel he can take, to get one to help him in the 
work of the ministry, and to bring a man amongst us, upon probation, in order to 
settlement, if he can. 

The Rev. John Southmayd, v/ho came to Waterbury to preach 
when he was but twenty-three years of age, wove the pattern of his 
life so closely into the history of the town, that it is impossible to 
separate the one from the other. The young- town and the young 
minister grew side by side. The story of the New England minister 
before 1740 vibrates with life for the coming historian, and few 
clearer, steadier, more benign leaders may be found than our own 
Southmayd. The reader is referred, for his life and work, to the 
history of the town from 1699 to 1755, and also to "The Churches of 
Mattatuck," pp. 187 to 196. He was the ordained pastor of the First 
church from May 30, 1705, to March, 1740 (p. 335), and acting pastor 
for torty-one years. His resignation of the pastorate may be found 
on page 321. It occurred six monthsbefore the formal organization 
of a second ecclesiastical society within the township (Chapter 
XXV). His legal pastorate probably continued until the ordination 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 607 

of the Rev. Mark Leavenworth in 1740. Owing to a chasm in our 
town records, covering the period including Mr. Leavenworth's 
advent into the pastorate of the church, we have little knowledge 
of its accompanying events (see pp. 335, 338). Mr. Southmayd was 
a strong man in character and intellect, a man of wealth and of 
great influence in the community. He lived seventeen years after 
his resignation of the pastoral office, acting as magistrate and fill- 
ing various positions of public trust, and doubtless remaining by 
far the most influential member of the church to which he had 
ministered. 

He was succeeded by Mark Leavenworth, who, after preaching a 
few times on trial, was in Jtme, 1739, unanimously invited to the 
pastorate.* 

Mr. Leavenworth was the sixth son of Dr. (and Deacon) Thomas 
Leavenworth of Stratford, where he was born m 17 11, His mother 
was Mary, daughter of Edmund Dorman. He graduated at Yale 
college in the class of 1737, under the presidency of the Rev. Elisha 
Williams. Having secured one of the Bishop Berkeley scholar- 
ships, he remained in New Haven two years, studying theology, 
and was licensed to preach October 10, 1738. His ordination took 
place in March, 1740, several months after his removal to Water- 
burv. He received a ^500 "settlement," and his salary was fixed 
at ^150 a year. But recent conversions of prominent men to Epis- 
copacy had created distrust in the minds of caiitious Congregation- 
alists, and Mr. Leavenworth was required to give a bond for ^500, 
to be paid to the society "if he should, within twenty years from 
that time, become a churchman, or by immorality or heresy render 
himself unfit for a gospel minister, — to be decided by a council." 
Undoubtedly the becoming a churchman was the thing to be 
specially provided against. In about nine years, however, the 
society, apparently of their own motion, released him from his 
bond. In February, a month before the time for his ordination, he 
married Ruth Peck, daughter of Deacon Jeremiah Peck of North- 
bury parish, and granddaughter of the first minister of the church. 

He had hardly become fairly settled in his ministry when all his 
tact, judgment and influence were put to the test. There had been 
a great deterioration in morals, and doubtless some lapses in 
religious doctrine; but when, in 1740, the Rev. George Whitefield 
went through the country speaking, in words such as few men have 
the power to utter, of righteousness, temperance and a judgment to 
come, all New England trembled, and the cry rose up, " What shall 
we do to be saved ? " Young men like Mr. Leavenworth, with high 

* The following account of Mr. Leavenworth is abridged from F. J. Kingsbury's paper in " The 
Churches of Mattatuck," pp. 197-208. 



6o8 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

hopes and earnest enthiisiasm, threw themselves into the move- 
ment, fully believing that it was the Lord's doing, while the older 
and more conservative people of longer experience, of whom Mr. 
Southmayd was a representative, saw in it but a temporary wave of 
excitement, already accompanied by some excesses, and doubted 
much whereunto the thing would grow. Cries of heresy were in 
the air, the odium thcologiciiin was aroused, and in 1744 Mr. Leaven- 
worth and two others, for assisting at the ordination of the Rev. 
Mr. Lee of Salisbury, who was supjDOsed to be in sympathy with 
the new movement, and whose church was gathered under the Cam- 
bridge platform, were tried and suspended from all associational 
communion. It does not appear, howxver, that the relations of Mr. 
Leavenworth to his people were very seriously affected. He was 
evidently a man of broad charity, and of a catholic spirit, for in 
1747 he declined that part of his salary which was raised by tax on 
the Episcopal portion of the inhabitants, although his legal right 
to it was clear; but his sense of justice rebelled, and he seems 
always to have had the courage of his convictions. In 1749 a great 
and fatal sickness appeared in the town (p. 370). Dr. Bronson esti- 
mates the deaths at six per cent of the whole population. There 
were hardly enough of the well to care for the sick and bury the 
dead. There was difficulty in getting medicine, and Mr. Leaven- 
worth volunteered to go on horseback to Norwich and procure a 
supply. 

In 1750, after several years of enfeebled health, the first Mrs. 
Leavenworth died, and not very long after he married Sarah, 
daughter of Captain Joseph Hull of Derby. She was a person of 
much character, dignity and influence. wShe was the mother of all 
his children except one. wShe survived him several years, and died 
in 1808. She was universally known as Madam Leavenworth, a 
title which was perhaps due to her position by the etiquette of the 
time, but was due to her personality also, and perhaps in part to 
her two-wheeled chair or chaise — the only vehicle of the kind in 
town. 

In 1760, when about fifty years old, he accepted the position of 
chaplain in Colonel Whiting's regiment, called into service to repel 
the attacks of French and Indians on our northern frontier. He 
was away from home on this service eight months. HoUister says:* 
" The amount of fatigue endured by the Connecticut troops was 
almost incredible." Putnam was there as lieutenant-colonel, and 
wherever he went there was very apt to be fighting and sure to be 
work. Mr. Leavenworth was appointed chaplain again the follow- 



* History of Connecticut, Vol. II, p. 97. 



THE FIBS! CHURCH TO 1825. 609 

ing year, but probably felt that he was needed at home. When the 
Revolutionary conflict came on there was no donbt where he would 
be found. He threw himself into it with all the enthusiasm and 
energy of his nature. He was early on the state committee for rais- 
ing troops. Were it not that he was now well on in years, he would 
probably have been found again at the front.* In 1793, at the age 
of eighty-two, when the inconsistenc}^ of slavery with freedom 
began to impress itself on the public mind, we find his name on 
the list of the new "Society for the Promotion of Freedom"- — a 
fact showing again his ready sympathy with new ideas whenever 
their tendency was to the uplifting of humanity, and his prompt- 
ness to act in the line of his convictions. 

The last prominent public act of his life was when in 1795, at 
the age of eighty-four, he laid the corner stone of a new meeting 
house for his people — the third erected by the old society. 

Mr. Leavenworth is described to us as a man of medium size, 
erect figure and quick movement. He had much dignity of manner, 
but a quick sense of humor, and was on terms of familiarity with 
his people, though the distance which in those days existed between 
the minister and his flock was doubtless duly maintained. Dr. 
Bronson has preserved several anecdotes illustrating these traits in 
his character, f The life of a New England country minister, how- 
ever busy, useful and influential it may be, leaves behind but a 
meagre record for historic uses, and it is only by detached facts, 
accidentally preserved, that we are able to reproduce to any degree 
the times in which he lived, his influence upon them and his per- 
sonal character. In an account book of the society, covering the 
last thirty years of the century, I we get (or think we do) bright 
little flecks of light on the benevolence of Mr. Leavenworth's 
nature, through the receipts he gives, sometimes discharging the 
society from its dues at a time when there was a balance in his 
favor, sometimes announcing that the rate bill given to an indi- 
vidual to collect for him had been satisfied, and requesting that the 
collector be discharged. The unwritten lines that lie only half 
obliterated beneath the language used, impel the belief that the 
widow, whose ministerial rate to Mr. Leavenworth was but " seven 
pence," and who brought " nine quarts of corn " to pay it with, was 



♦Three of his sons did go — one with Arnold on his first trip to Boston, another serving as surgeon dur- 
ing the whole eight long, tedious years. All three were graduates of Yale. 

t Bronson's History of Waterbury, pp. 289, 290. 

$ This volume (about eighteen inches by seven, and containing about eighty leaves) has recently been 
returned to the church. On the cover is written : " Society's Book." On the inside of the cover is inscribed : 
" This book belongs to the first Society in Waterbury, and is a gift from the Benevolent Esqr. Hopkins, 
A. D. 1770." Its first date is January, 1770, and a few accounts are brought to it at that time " from the old 
book." 

39 



6io HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

was not sent empty-handed away. He was evidently a man of 
affairs, and took an active interest in everything relating- to the 
public welfare. That he was a good business manager appears 
from the fact that he lived in a hospitable and somewhat elegant 
manner, and sent three of his sons to college. He also became a 
a large landholder, in the days when land was the principal source 
of wealth. Dr. Samuel Elton used to speak of the impression made 
upon him as a boy, when Mr. Leavenworth, then certainly not less 
than eighty years of age, preached in Watertown. He remembered 
him as a man of medium height, of erect figure, bright, dark eyes, 
and a commanding voice. He stood for a moment in the pulpit, 
looking around upon his congregation, and then announced his 
text: " Your fathers, where are they? and the prophets, do they live 
forever?" His theme was the changes that had taken place in that 
congregation within his own memory, and the impression he pro- 
duced upon his youthful hearer remained vivid and profound after 
seventy years. 

The long period of Mr. Leavenworth's ministry was one of 
upheaval and excitement. First came the "great awakening," and 
soon afterward the seven years' struggle of the French and Indian 
war; and this had hardly closed when the conflict began with the 
British government, which ended in the war of the Revolution, 
when neighbor was set against neighbor and friend against friend. 
A large part of the Episcopal society, which had now grown to be 
quite strong, sided with the mother country, and the town was 
almost equally divided in opinion. There was dissension, friction, 
and doubtless much hard talking, but on the whole, things went as 
peacefully as could have been expected. After the Revolution 
came the perhaps still more trying period of almost anarchy, so 
that nothing was settled or sure until after the adoption of the con- 
stitution and the inauguration of Washington as first president, in 
1789. What a half century for a man to have lived through! and 
what an experience — to have borne the burden of responsibility 
for the religious, moral, social, secular and political welfare and 
training of two or three generations, in such a time of turmoil and 
unrest! To have successfully carried a church and a town through 
such a period and maintained the love and respect of the people 
implies character and ability well worthy of our admiration and 
our praise. 

Mr. Leavenworth died August 26, 1797, in the fifty-eighth year 
of his ministry. An obituary notice published at the time of 
his death closes with these apparently just and well considered 
words : 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 6ii 

To the endearing qualities of a kind and affectionate husband and parent were 
very apparently united in this reverend father that piety towards God, that 
diffusive benevolence toward men, that undisguised frankness and dignity of 
deportment, that persevering faithfulness in office, that unshaken trust in the 
merits of the Saviour, that heavenly-mindedness and calm converse with death, 
which abundantly evidenced to all his acquaintance the child of God and the 
heir of heaven. 

The reference to Mr. Leavenworth's connection with the third 
meeting house leads ns naturally to glance backward over the his- 
tory of the meeting houses which preceded this. The first step 
toward the building of a house of worship in Waterbury was made 
in 1691, by petitioning the General Court for assistance in the 
work. The court granted Waterbury its country rate (see pp. 
231-233). Eight years later the pulpit and seats were in course 
of construction. In 1702 — ten years after its foundations were 
laid — the house was finished (p. 249). It stood about in the 
centre of the present Green, with its main entrance on the south 
side, and doors on its east and west sides. It had a pulpit and 
seats, but no pews, and it had seating capacity for about 300 
persons. In July of that year a committee was appointed "to 
place the people where they should sit." There is, therefore, 
reason to think that Mr. Peck had no meeting house to preach 
in during his pastorate here, and that young Mr. Southmayd 
was the first and only officiating minister in that church edifice. 
After six years, alterations and improvements were made (p. 278). 
After six years more, a gallery was built around three sides of 
the audience room, and other changes were introduced, which 
occupied four years (see pp. 288, 289, and for further changes, 
293, 294). 

The story of the building of the second meeting house — begun 
in 1727 and finished in 1729 — has been fully told by the aid of Mr. 
Southmayd's little meeting-house book (see pages 283-300 of this 
volume). Within eleven years of its building there went out from 
this house, of its members and congregation, a sufficient number of 
persons to form a church society in Westbury, one in Northbury, 
one in Waterbury (the Episcopal), and one, in part, in Oxford. 
Because of these and subsequent departures, the meeting house 
served to accommodate the people for sixty -eight years. Mr. 
Southmayd was the only minister of the first church edifice, and 
he and Mr. Leavenworth were the only officiating pastors of the 
second. 

After 1740, we no longer find on our town records minutes of 
church or ecclesiastical affairs. Dr. Bronson tells us in 1858 that 



6i2 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

the society records of the First church were in existence a few years 
before that date. His father, Judge Bennet Bronson, had made 
notes from the records, and from these notes Dr. Bronson obtained 
information that covers the period of thirty years, from 17-40 to 
1770. He says that in 1752 the town * " voted to repair the meeting 
house by having windows in front, of twenty-four squares of seven 
by nine or nine by ten, with window frames." He gives also the 
following items: In 1769 "those who are seated in the seats" had 
permission "at their own expense to turn them into pews," and, 
''that men and their wives may be seated together in the pews." 
The extant church records begin in 1795, and the society records in 
1806. But from the old account book, already referred to, we learn 
that between 1770 and 1793 frequent repairs and some alterations, 
were made in the meetinghouse; in 1778, new steps; in 1786, a new 
window; in 1789 it was shingled, and in 1792 the interior was im- 
proved. We also learn who furnished the wood for the steps; who 
put in the new window and many panes of glass; w^ho furnished 
the "putte;" and, of the shingles, the names of the men who 
brought them by the thousand, and that 2700 were left, and taken 
by Mr. Leavenworth at a reduction from the price given by the 
society. The following items appear in the way of improvementr 
or embellishments in 1792: " Twelve sticks of twist to make a fringe 
for the cushion for the pulpit, five skeins of silk for the same anc" 
three of twist." At about the same time there is an entry that sug- 
gests the possibility that Benjamin Upson (who was chorister, and 
who at a later date received the public thanks of the church for his 
efficient services), was assisted in his songs of praise by the timbrel 
or small drum, as two " taboreans " are among the articles furnished 
to the society by him. 

The sweeping of the meeting house from year to year was done 
asaruleby the choice maidens of the church, with an occasional 
exception in favor of a dignified matron, a lieutenant or other youth, 
or a poor slave. The first man on the list was Moses Cook, who swept 
in 177 1, assisted by the "Widow Upson." They were succeeded in 
1774 by "Silence," a slave of Joseph Hopkins, in 1778 by Dinah 
Cook, and in later years by Mrs. Susanna Bronson, wife of Captain 
Ezra, Jesse Hopkins, Lucy, Hannah and vSybel Cook, Aurelia, 
Rusha and Sarah Clark, Ruth Adams and Lieutenant Samuel Judd. 
The average payment to each was about ^i.ios a year, sometimes 
in wheat and rye. But two and sometimes three were engaged in 
the work at the same time. 

* As our town records for 1752 contain no such vote, he must have found the minute on the now missing 
church or society records. 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 613 

Regarding- the first bell in Waterbury, nothing- very satisfactory 
can be said. Lambert, in his "History of New Haven Colony," says: 

In 1740 it was voted to purchase a new bell of about 600 pounds weight for the 
second meeting house in Milford, the old one being cracked. The old bell was 
taken at the foundrj- for old metal, in part pay for the new one. It was brazed and 
sold to a society in Waterbury, and now (183S) hangs in the belfry of the church at 
Salem Bridge, and is considered to be the best bell in the state." 

The second meeting house apparently had a bell, probably the one 
here referred to. There was no meeting house in Salem until 1782, 
and the cracked bell did not, we may think, lie forty years in the 
foundry. In 1788 the following item is found: "By a grant of the 
society to pay for the bell £2,A^-" The school house bell appears 
by name in 1790, in which year two persons are paid, apparently for 
ringing two bells. "Africa"* had the pleasure of ringing that 
early bell for three months. wSamuel Harrison is credited in 1791 
"for work at the school house bell and wheel." 

From a single stray leaf of the society records, recently recovered, 
we glean that in 1793 a committee was appointed to inspect the meet- 
ing house and estimate the cost of necessary repairs. The report 
must have been unsatisfactory, for it was decided to build a new 
louse of worship. About one-third of the voters were averse to 
caving the old meeting house, and it can readily be seen that their 
learts clung to it with strength and with all the power of its grand 
associations. It had been the meeting house of the township — the 
place where the last of the founders worshipped— the church home of 
Southmayd, of Leavenworth for more than half a century. White- 
field's voice had been heard within it, Hopkins and Bellamy had 
stood there; from out of it four congregations had gone, — with 
unutterable sorrow to the one that remained; with pastoral bless- 
ing and unwritten benedictions had passed from its doors men and 
boys on their way to serve England in her many wars, and, at last, 
to serve themselves with liberty against England's behest. 

For our knowledge of the building of the third house of worship 
we are indebted to Dr. Bronson. He tells us that on January 2, 
1795, the society voted to build a meeting house, and appointed a 
committee to fix on a plan and place to build. The site chosen was 
near the old spot— east of it— the size sixty by forty-two feet. It 
was decided that the church should have a steeple, should be 
covered the ensuing summer and finished by November i, 1796. 
To defray the cost of it a tax was laid of three shillings on the 
pound. A contract was made with William Leavenworth to build 



*He was born September i6, 1772, and was the son of Fortune, a slave of Dr. Preserved Porter. 



6i4 



HISTORY OF WATKliBURY. 



it. The price ag'reed upon was ^850. For the above reason, Mr. 

Leavenworth's bill of items does not appear in the society accounts. 

But the contract did not include the stone steps, which were quite 

noteworthy, if we may judge of their 
:^ size and importance by the cost of 

obtaining them. They were brought 
from Cheshire, and many were the 
journeys made from Waterbury to 
fetch them. They were laid in De- 
cember, 1796. John Adams and Noah 
U. Norton " helped to lay them." 
The only " licjuor for the workmen " 
mentioned in the account book was 
used on this occasion. The corner 
stone of the building was, it is said, 
inscribed with the initials of Mr. 
Leavenworth's name. Many of the 
stones used in the foundation walls 




THIRD HOUSE Ol' WORSHIP OF THE FIRST CHURCH (1796 TO 1840), AS DESCRIBED FROM MEMORY. 
(AKTER\V.-\RD GOTHIC HALL.) 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1SS5. 615 

of the Second Congregational chnrch were from this church build- 
ing of 1795, and it was hoped that in the changes made in 1894 by 
the Odd Fellows the corner stone of a century ago might be found, 
but it was not seen. 

Dr. Bronson says that the new meeting house was dedicated in 
1796. Probably he fixed the date from the time mentioned in the 
contract for its building. The precise date of its dedication seems 
to be determined by an extant letter, written by the Rev. Edward 
Porter to Dr. Trumbull, asking that gentleman to preach the "dedi- 
cation sermon in the meeting house on the 3d of May, 1797." Mr. 
Leavenworth lived but three months and seventeen days after its 
dedication. 

Reference has been made to the extant records of the church as 
containing no earlier date than 1795. There is no doubt that 
records of the church were kept, perhaps from the beginning, but 
they were probably included in Mr. Leavenworth's manuscripts, 
and met the same fate as these, whatever that may have been. To 
these manuscripts there is an interesting reference in the first 
volume of records, in the report of a meeting held on March 5, 
1800. A petition was presented by certain persons who desired 
baptism for their children without being themselves communicants 
in the church, and this statement follows in the minutes: 

In deliberating upon this petition, the question was brought into view, " How 
shall we consider the standing of those persons who owned the covenant twenty or 
twenty-five years ago? the practice being abolished by Mr. Leavenworth about 
that time." Being unable to determine with precision who such covenanters were, 
Deacon Joseph Hopkins and Deacon Stephen Bronson were appointed to ask Madam 
Leavenworth for the liberty of looking over the manuscripts of her deceased hus- 
band. Parson Leavenworth, that the names of the covenanters might be ascer- 
tained. 

The first volume of records itself opens with a quotation from 
these manuscripts, as follows: 

On the eighteenth of November, 1795, Mr. Edward Porter was installed col- 
league pastor of the First church of Christ in Waterbury, with Mr. Mark Leaven- 
worth, who has served in said church fifty-six years. He was preceded by Mr. 
John Southmayd, who served the church about forty years; and he was preceded 
by Mr. Jeremy Peck, who was the first settled minister in this town, but who served 
not many years, as he was in advanced age when he was introduced. 

This memorandum — apparently in the Rev. Edward Porter's hand- 
writing—is described as "an extract from MSS. of the Rev. Mark 
Leavenworth." 

It will be proper to introduce here what follows immediately, on 
page 3 of the records — namelv the "confession of faith and cove- 



6i6 HISTORY OF WATERBUEY. 

nant." These are probably the work of Mr. Leavenworth, although 
of what date within the long- period of his pastorate it is impossi- 
ble to say. The confession, while more of the " old school" type 
than that which superseded it in 1832 (see Volume II, page 586), is 
remarkable for its simplicity and brevity, and also for its omissions. 
It is as follows: 

We believe there is one only living and true God, in three personal characters, 
the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, in whom are all natural and moral perfec- 
tions; the Maker, Preserver and Governor of all things. 

We believe that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the word of 
God, containing a perfect rule of faith and practice. 

We believe that God made man originally in his own image, in knowledge, 
righteousness and holiness, and that by the violation of the covenant made with 
the first man, Adam, he and all his posterity fell into a state of sin and misery. 

We believe that it pleased God from the beginning to choose some of this fallen 
race to salvation through sanctification of the spirit and belief of the truth, and 
that in the fulness of time he sent his Son, Jesus Christ, into the world to redeem 
and save sinful and lost men by perfect obedience and most bitter sufferings, e\en 
unto death, by way of atonement and satisfaction for sin; and that he is the onh^ 
Saviour, Prophet, Priest, and King of his people. 

We believe that he arose from the dead on the third day and ascended on high. 

We believe that repentance of sin, faith in Jesus Christ and new obedience are 
conditions and qualifications of eternal life. 

We believe that baptism and the Lord's supper are of divine institution, to be 
attended and observed by his people in all ages, to his second coming. 

We believe the doctrine of the general resurrection both of the righteous and 
the wicked; the general judgment and the life everlasting. And 

We believe that Christ hath, and to the end will have, a church and kingdom in 
the world; hath appointed ordinances and set officers in his church, for the edify- 
ing of his saints, and perfecting his body, the church. 

The "covenant" that follows the creed is also brief and eminently 
reasonable — a covenant which no sincere member of a Christian 
church to-day could hesitate to adopt as his own. Its opening sen- 
tence contains a reference to "the sins and follies of our lives," and 
this note, historically significant, follows at the end: "This clause 
has, by vote of the church, been lately prefixed to the covenant, in 
order to supersede the necessity of public and particular confes- 
sions of immorality of which those who are candidates for church 
privileges may formerly have been o■^lilt3^" 

In the record book the covenant is immediately followed by an 
interesting "Catalogue of Church Members," showing the actual 
constituency of the First church at the close of 1795. The list con- 
tains ninety-three names, thirty-seven of which are names of men. 
The first is " Mark Leavenworth, Seignior Pastor," the second, 
"Edward Porter, Junior Pastor," then "Andrew Bronson and Joseph 
Hopkins, Deacons"; and the rest follow in alphabetical order, 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 617 

including' the wives of the senior pastor and the two deacons. A 
large proportion of the prominent men of the community are, of 
course, included, and the last name {iiot in alphabetical order) is 
*'Mino-o."* 

In the account book which has been referred to as containing 
the only records of the parish between 1740 and 1795, there is 
almost nothing in relation to the period covered by the Revolu- 
tionary war. One wotild be led to question whether the usual ser- 
vices were conducted. The following item is interesting, being "A 
copy of the Rev'd Mr. Leavenworth's Discharge to the year 1782": 

Waterbury, Nov. 29, A. D. 17S2. 
This may Certify that the Society in Waterbur\r are discharged from all Obliga- 
tions to me by way of Salary to the year 177S, Inclusive, by me. 

Mark Leavenworth. 

When j\Ir. Leavenworth became an invalid, certainly as early as 
February, 1794, he entered into an agreement with his people to 
receive a certain anjount of monc}" " in lieu of his salar}^" Mention 
is made of two payments of ^40 each. At this time also we find 
the following persons apparently "supplying the pulpit": Josiah 
Edwards, Heman Ball, vS. Williston and Edward Porter. 

The effect of the Revolution on the church and religion must, 
upon the whole, have been good; but its immediate consequences 
might almost be characterized as disastrous. That the Episcopal 
parish should have suffered was a matter of course. But in the 
First society, where one would suppose the success of the colonial 
cause ought to have involved an increase of prosperity, the actual 
result was a long and serious decline in religion. In the Christian 
Spectator for June, 1833, there is an elaborate article, written by the 
Rev. Luther Hart, formerly pastor of the church in Plymouth, 
entitled, "The Religious Declension in New England during the 
Latter Half of the Last Century." As Mr. Hart clearly shows, the 
declension was very real and very widespread, and Waterbur}^ was 
involved in it. It came partly as a reaction from the violent meas- 
sures and extreme views of the revival period, and partly as a result 

* Dr. Bronson in his History (p. 321) says: " The first slave in Waterbury of which I have certain knowl- 
edge was Mingo, who was the property of Deacon Thomas Clark, about 1730. He was then a boy. His mas- 
ter used to let him for hire by the day, first to drive plow, then to walk with the team. At Deacon Clark's 
death in 1764 Mingo was allowed to choose which of the sons he would live with. He preferred to remain at 
the old homestead with Thomas; but after the latter commenced keeping tavern, he did not like his occupa- 
tion and went to reside with Timothy on Town Plot. He had a family, owned considerable property, and 
died in 1800." 

It appears from this list that Mrs. Susanna Munson, who was one of those that were excommunicated for 
"going off to the Methodists," was "the wife of Samuel Munson," and that Mrs. Sarah Hoadley of the same 
little company, referred to in Vol. II, p. 696, was "the wife of Andrew Hoadley." The five converts to 
Methodism are marked in the catalogue, " Rejected, Sept. 16, 1800." 



6i8 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

of political conditions — the influence of the times upon religion and 
the church. Details cannot be given, for the records are wanting; 
but we are justified in thinking of the days which followed the 
Revolutionary war as days of decadence and gloom. This, hoAvever, 
was not to last. The era of renewed prosperity may be regarded 
as dating from the building of the third house of worship. When 
the sound of the bell — placed in the steeple not long after the dedi- 
cation — first rung out over the hills, and it was voted that the Epis- 
copal society should have the use of it '' on all proper occasions," 
it was evident that religion was again uttering her voice, and that 
religion meant charity and brotherly love. The discords of the 
Revolutionary time were dying out, to be revived no more, and the 
work of the Lord was to be accomplished by new hands and upon a 
broader basis. It was at this epoch (1793) that the Congregational 
churches of Connecticut began their noble frontier mission work — 
a work which ere long extended from Vermont to Louisiana, and 
which through varying phases has continued until now. 

Mr. Edward Porter preached for three months as a candidate, 
and in October (1794) was hired for a year, his salary being ;£()o 
and p{^io in wood. The year following, he received an invitation to 
settle as colleague pastor, with the offer of ;£ioo salary and his 
wood and the use of the parsonage land after Mr. Leavenworth's 
death. As already mentioned, he was installed November 18, 1795. 
He was a son of Deacon Noah Porter of Farmington, and a gradu- 
ate of Yale college in 1786. He married Dorothea, daughter of 
Isaac Gleason, also of P^armington, November 26, 1789, and probably 
brought his wife with him to Waterbury when he began his term 
of service as a "supply." Of their four children whose names 
appear in the Family Records (Ap. p. 105), the eldest, a daughter, 
was born (probably in Waterbury) March 4, 1795. Of the three sons 
the second attained to eminence as a physician (see Vol. II, p. 862). 

Mr. Leavenworth's death took place after Mr. Porter had served 
as colleague pastor for a year and three-quarters. His term of ser- 
vice as sole pastor was very brief, for at a meeting of the church 
on December 20, 1797, he requested "that the church would grant 
him a dismission from his engagements to them as their pastor," 
adding : 

The reason of my making this request arises wholly from my bodily infirmities, 
— it having pleased the great Head of the church ... by long and painful 
afflictions to incapacitate me for the great work I have undertaken among you. 
That I have made the same request to the society, . . . that I have made pro- 
posals relative to temporalities, and that they have freely complied with them, I 
need not inform you; nor that the day I have chosen for the painful execution of 
my request is the tenth of January, 1798. 



THE FIRST CHUBCH TO 1825. 619 

The church, "having" duly considered this al^ictive dispensation of 
divine providence " found themselves "constrained to consent " to 
their pastor's request and voted to call a council of churches with 
reference to the matter on the day by him proposed. The formality 
and elaborateness of the record (it fills four pages) is an undesigned 
testimony to the seriousness of such an event as this in the life of 
a church in which, although more than a hundred years old, no dis- 
mission of a pastor had ever occiirred. 

Mr. Porter was dismissed on the day specified by him, January 
10, 1798. He remained in Waterbury for some years, and in active 
connection with the church. The minutes preceding 1798 are signed 
by him as "scribe "; in that year no meetings of the church seem to 
have been held, and the minutes for January 17, 1799, are signed by 
him as "clerk." They record a call to " Mr. David Smith," a gradu- 
ate of Yale college in 1795, to the pastorate, and mention that Mr. 
Porter was one of the committee appointed " to confer with Mr. 
Smith on his mode of church discipline, and to present him with a 
copy of the foregoing votes." Mr. Porter, during his stay in Water- 
bury, devoted himself to business, and became, like a good many 
others, interested in the manufacture of clocks. At a meeting of 
the church in 181 2 a complaint was introduced by one of the dea- 
cons, reflecting upon Mr. Porter's integrity as a business man. A 
" mutual council " of neighboring churches was called — of which, 
by the way, the Rev. Lyman Beecher of Litchfield was a member — 
to consider the matter. Judging from a clause in the finding of this 
council, the question at issue was a technical one, a question of cas- 
uistry, and the decision upon the whole seems to have been in Mr. 
Porter's favor. The church did not accept it, however, and Mr. 
Porter was excommunicated, August 16, 1812. On September 28 a 
committee was appointed " to act in behalf of the church in procur- 
ing such counsel as they shall judge necessary for the defence of 
the church before the consociation to be convened in this place 
the next week." This would indicate that the case was brought 
before the consociation; but the result is not referred to in the 
church minutes, according to which no other business meeting was 
held until the following February. Mr. Porter subsequently re- 
turned to Farmington to reside, and died in New Haven in 1828. 

The call extended to David Smith in January, 1799, was not 
accepted, but he continued to serve the church until April. He was 
followed by Jehu Clark (Yale, 1794), who stayed a month and came 
again. The next candidate was Holland Weeks, who preached 
for three Sundays. He was followed by David Smith (again) and 
Salmon King and William B. Ripley, both recent graduates of Yale 



620 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

colleg-e, who filled up the time until October. From the payments 
recorded in the account book it wovild seem that during one-half of 
the year 1798, or thereabout, the church was without a pulpit supply. 
At a meeting on October 18, 1799, "the question was put whether 
this church approve of the Christian character and ministerial 
qualifications of Mr. Holland Weeks." It was "voted unanimously 
in the afifirmative," and Mr. Weeks was invited " to take the pastoral 
care and charg-e of this church." Ten days later his answer "was 
read by the clerk [Mr. Porter] in the following words," and it is 
remarkable, as compared with most of the documents of the period, 
for its directness and brevity: 

Brethren of the First church of Christ in "Waterbury: 

I have taken yonr call into consideration. I view it as a call of Providence, and 
therefore accept. That the Lord may bless the latter end of the near and inter- 
esting relation into which we are now entering even more than the beginning, is 
the prayer of your affectionate pastor elect. 

Holland Wekks. 

In anticipation of the ordination which was about to take place, a 
day was set apart for fasting and prayer, "agreeably to apostolic 
exaiTqDle," and Mr. Weeks was ordained pastor on November 20, 
1799. 

The young man thus introduced into Waterbury life was born 
in Pomfret in 1768, and there passed his early years. He graduated 
at Dartmouth college in 1795, and received from Yale the honorary 
degree of M. A. in 1800. "I began/' he says, "in 1784, at the age of 
sixteen, to turn my attention with peculiar interest and conscious 
delight to the study of Christian and experimental theology."* It 
was natural, with such tastes, that he should study for the ministry, 
and Waterbury was his first parish. In a communication to the 
American on February 24, 1874, E. B. Cooke spoke of him as a man of 
commanding personal appearance and more than ordinary ability. 
This estimate is borne out by the published sermons of Mr. Weeks 
which have been preserved (see Volume II, page 954) and by his 
subsequent career. Another old resident — -Mrs. Hannah Morris, the 
first person baptized in the third meeting-house — described him to 
the writer as a tall and portly man, with full face, black hair, dark 
eyes and a fine tenor voice. He was so fond of singing that if a 
brother minister — a home missionary, for instance — was " occupying 
the pulpit," he would take his place in the singers' gallery. He 
was a school visitor, and tried to teach singing in the schools. He 
was fond of children and familiar with them, and in his j^astoral 
visits was very apt to have the little ones in his lap. On Decem- 

* See Vol. II of The New Churchiuan (i843-'44), p. 726. 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 621 

ber 10, 1799 — three weeks after his ordination — he married Harriet 
Byron, a daughter of Moses Hopkins, Esq., of Great Barrington, and 
a granddaughter of the Rev. Dr. vSamuel Hopkins, who was thus 
brought back to the home of her ancestors. They had five children 
(for four of whom see Ap. p. 148). Their dwelling — a gambrel- 
roofed house — stood a little south of where the Apothecaries' Hall 
building now stands, but was afterward removed to Union street. 

Not only does Mr. Weeks as a Waterbury minister belong to the 
nineteenth century, but we may look at his ordination as marking 
the commencement of a second era in the history of Waterbury 
pastors ; and no contrast could be greater than that between the 
second era and the first. From the organization of the church to 
the death of Mr. Leavenworth, it was scarcely a day without a min- 
ister, yet the number of pastors was only three, or, including Mr. 
Porter, four. But between 1800 and 1865 there were nine pastors 
and two "acting pastors," besides nine or ten years during which 
the pulpit was vacant or filled only by candidates. Mr. Weeks, 
however, stayed with the church a little over seven years. The 
causes of his leaving are indicated in his farewell discourse, which 
was published and has been preserved. He said in that discourse 
(pages 16, 17): 

I do not claim to have been without my foibles and imperfections;* but whether 
I have in any measure been faithful will be made to appear at a future day. 
There may be some who are gratified by the event of our separation. But there 
are others whose feelings of friendship exceed the powers of utterance. I most 
cordially reciprocate every such sentiment which here exists. It may possibly 
seem to those who are not fully acquainted with every circumstance that this sepa- 
ration might have been prevented. It is true it might. But I trust that I under- 
stand what has been done by the society. Methods of support have seemed in a 
great measure to fail, and I have felt myself unable, without such support, to devote 
myself to the work of the ministry. Of course my usefulness in this place has 
seemed to be at an end. It is true I have had friends who have made me kind and 
generous presents for my support. And I now thank them sincerely for all those 
expressions of their love. But it has been judged by better men than myself that 
it would not be expedient for me to tarry, under these circumstances. Our connec- 
tion has therefore been dissolved. Yet my heart's desire and prayer to God for 
this Israel is, that they might be saved. I also need and earnestly desire your 
prayers for me and my family, in our present dark and uncomfortable prospects. 

It is probably upon these frank statements that the assertion is 
based, in Kingsley's " Ecclesiastical Contributions " (page 497), that 

♦Horace Hotchkiss in his (unpublished) Reminiscences says that Mr. Weeks "did not succeed in retain- 
ing the esteem of his people, and remained only a few years," and seems to attribute this, in part at least, to 
an exhibition of passion and cruelty by Mr. Weeks in " beating an unmanageable horse to death on the pub- 
lic square. The affair," he continues, "created a good deal of indignation, and early the following morning 
the stuffed skin of the horse was seen standing near the church door, accompanied by an efifigy of a man 
holding a large knife. It remained during the day, in sight of Mr. Weeks's house." One cannot but wish 
for a fuller and perhaps more nearly colorless statement in regard to this strange incident. 



622 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Mr. Weeks "was dismissed for want of support." The prospect for 
him, as well as for the parish, seems to have been gloomy enough, 
but Mr. Weeks survived these early trials and many others, and 
lived to do his Master's work in various vineyards. The discourse 
just referred to was preached December 21, 1806. He had made 
known his desire for a dismission in November; the society had 
voted to unite with him in this object, but " not to submit pecuniary 
matters," and his dismission had taken place on December 10. It 
was a year later (December 30, 1807) that he was installed as pastor 
of the church in Pittsford, Vt., organized in 1784. On August 9, 
1815, he was installed pastor of the First church in Abington, Mass., 
and while he held this position his theological beliefs underwent a 
great and serious transformation. It appears that his first contact 
with the opinions of Swedenborg took place during his Waterbury 
pastorate. He found in the possession of the Rev. Israel B. Wood- 
ward of Wolcott one of Swedenborg's books, and spent two hours in 
its perusal. It appeared to hiin to be " a most wonderful produc- 
tion"; how to account for its existence he could not determine to 
his own satisfaction; and he found afterward that " a curiosity 
remained with him to know more about it." wSome years after this, 
apparently while settled at Pittsford, he met with another Sweden- 
borgian work, the " Halcyon Luminar}'," and his curiosity was still 
more excited. But it was in 1818, after he had been at Abington 
for three years, that he " was led to the sight of an old minister's 
library" at Sandwich on Cape Cod, which contained a number of 
Swedenborg's works, and "commenced reading on October 10." The 
result was a prolonged mental conflict and, at length, on May 21, 
1820, the preaching of a sermon to his congregation (see Vol. II, 
page 954) which led to a trial for heresy before a council of 
churches and to his excommunication. " All the evils which I 
anticipated," he afterward said, " came upon me, and some that I 
did not expect. But never for a moment do I regret that I became 
a receiver of the heavenly doctrines." By a remarkable concurrence 
of events, however, a home for himself and his family had been 
prepared in advance in the new town of Henderson, in western New 
York, near Lake Ontario, and to that place he removed soon after 
the termination of his pastorate. He became a farmer, but at the 
same time made use of his opportunities to preach the new doc- 
trines he had received to his neighbors, and was instrumental in 
establishing there a congregation of the New Jerusalem church.* 



♦Among those who became converts to the new views were the different members of the Burnham family 
in Henderson. One of these, Edwin Burnham, married Mr. Weelcs's youngest daughter Elizabeth, who 
became the mother of Daniel H. Burnham, the man to whose skill and energy the success of the World's Fair 
at Chicago in 1893 was so largely due. Mrs. Burnham died at the age of eighty-three, at her son's home in 
Evanston, 111., January 15, 1893. 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 



623 



He lived to a g-ood old age, happ)- in the eonsciousness that he had 
found the way of truth and righteousness, and died amidst his 
friends and children on July 24, 1843. It is said of him in an obitu- 
ary notice in the Neiv Jerusalem Magazine for 1843 that " Mr. Weeks 
was a man of warm and kind feelings, of clear understanding and 
acute reasoning powers. He had an elevated sense of the dignity 
and importance of the ministerial office, and was well aware not 
only of the necessity of leading a life of charity, but also of main- 
taining sound doctrines in order to the advancement of the church." 
If we may judge from the circumstances connected with Mr. 
Weeks's dismission from Waterbury, the lowest ebb of the worldly 
prosperity of the First church was not reached, as has been sugges- 
ted, in 1795, but a dozen years later. The decadence which set in as 
a consequence of the Revolutionary war continued growing more 
and more serious until this time. The third meeting-house seems 
to have been built without a serious struggle; but this was perhaps 
the result in part of a spirit of rivalry — the Episcopal society being 
engaged at the same time in a similar task. Besides the building- 
of the meeting-house there was no other token of prosperity for 
several years to come. In 1774 the population of the entire town 
was 3526; in 1790 it was 6107 — an increase of seventy-three per 
cent — and in 1800 it had increased to over 7000 persons — that is, 
within the original limits. But the chief increase had not been 
within the bounds of the First society, and the church, certainly, 
showed few signs of a vigorous life. In 1795, as we have seen, the 
membership numbered only ninety-three, and for twenty years the 
accessions, except in January, 1800, and July, 1801, were very few. 
i\Iany minor tribulations had followed the building of the third 
meeting-house. The steeple would not stand upright and caused 
mtich trouble; the division of ministerial and trust funds with 
other societies — notably with Middlebury — had caused much 
annoyance and cost. When Mr. Weeks was dismissed the society 
laid a tax to raise $400 that was due on his salary. A rapid change, 
however, soon followed, which the present pastor of the church, in 
his bicentenary discourse, described as follows: 

Between 1800 and 1820 a double transformation took place which makes this 
epoch a marked one in the history of the town and the church. In the town at 
large that new era of prosperity was entered upon which still shines upon us and 
in the light and warmth of which we have grown to be a flourishing city. At the 
beginning of the century Waterbury was an ordinary country village, with less 
than an average supply of attractions, and a poor prospect before it. In the esti- 
mation of the surrounding towns it was a kind of Nazareth, of which nothing good 
could be said. But it had in it what was better than topographical advantages — a 
group of ingenious, industrious, wide-awake men, and it had through the shaping 



624 inSTORT OF WATERBURT. 

of events an hour of golden opportunity. In this quiet, unpromising village, just at 
the opening of the century, the manufacture of gilt buttons and of clocks was 
begun, and from that time until now the " brass industry " has steadily grown, and 
has transformed not only the old village, but the entire Naugatuck valley. The 
record becomes doubly interesting when we find that in spiritual things also there 
was a revival of prosperity. 

But it came slowly. The Rev. Mr. Weeks, in his farewell discourse, 
said to the people, " You will feel, I hope, the great importance of a 
speedy re-settlement of the gospel ministry. The longer you 
remain destitute, the greater the probability is that the state of the 
church and people will become more and more uncomfortable, 
broken and divided. If possible, let the first candidate you employ 
be the one on whom you fix your affections to be your minister." 
The hope thus expressed was hardly fulfilled, for the pastorate 
remained vacant from December, 1806, to November, 1808. Mr. 
Porter, the former pastor of the church, was on the committee for 



11 




supplying the pulpit during 1807, and to him was committed the 
care of the ministerial money. As early as April, Andrew Eliot, 
son of the Rev. Andrew Eliot who had recently died in the Fair- 
field pastorate, and a graduate of Yale in the class of 1799, was 
unanimously invited to become pastor, and the invitation seems to 
nave been pressed upon him; but in a frank and manly letter, 
which has been preserved,* he declined the call. He was settled in 



* Mr. Eliot's letter is as follows : 

New Haven, July 7th, 1807. 
Gentlemen : 

Your communication of June 25111, containing an invitation to settle with you in the work of the gospel 
ministry, I have received. You will please to accept my thanks for this renewed expression of regard. I did 
not expect or wish a renewal of your proposals, viewing it as a departure from long established custom. An 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1S25. 625 

New Milford in February, 1808, and continued there until his death 
in 1829. In 1818 he was made a member of the corporation of Yale 
college. In September (1807), Thomas Ruggles, a still younger can- 
didate—a graduate of Yale in 1805, and licensed in 1806 — preached 
for at least three Sundays,* and Reuben Taylor (Williams college, 
1806) and other candidates, or at least "supplies," followed; but 
without definite result until August of the following year. At a 
meeting on August 25, 1808, the church unanimously ''approved of 
the Christian character and ministerial qualifications of Mr. Luke 
Wood," and "invited him to take the pastoral care and charge of 
this church." The society " concurred," offering him a salary of 
$450 a year and the use of the " little pasture." A long communi- 
cation of acceptance from him was placed on record, a " fast " was 
appointed, according to custom, and Mr. Wood was ordained and 






installed, November 30, 1808. In preparation for his ordination 
a committee was directed to take charge of the meeting-house 



acceptance under such circumstances would place a man in a very delicate situation, and would doubtless, 
with some, give rise to the inference that his motives were improper and sinister. It might give a people 
improper ideas of dependence, and might lead to a mode of proceeding in affairs of this kind different from 
the present, less honorable to the ministry and injurious to the cause of religion. These considerations, 
together with the advice of those ministers whom I have had time to consult upon the subject, induce me to 
send an answer in the negative. 

With the most sincere wishes for the prosperity of your society, and with sentiments of personal esteem 

and respect, I subscribe myself 

Yours, etc., 

Andrew Eliot 

Messrs. John Kingsbury, Edward Porter, Elijah Hotchkiss, Edward Field. 

*The "supplies " who preached in 1798 received £1,45 a Sunday. At the time above referred to the fee 
seems to have been §6. The condition of the treasury is brought to view in a sad way by Mr. Eliot's receipt 
for one dollar. 
40 



626 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

on that da}', and to reserve sufficient seats for the council and 
clerg-y."* 

Luke Wood was born in vSomers in 1777. He was a grandson of 
Thomas Wood, one of the first deacons of the church in Somers, 
and in his early years "sat under the ministrations" of Dr. Charles 
Backus. He graduated at Dartmouth college in 1802, and pursued 
his professional studies under the eminent Dr. Emmons. He 
received the honorary degree of M. A. from Yale in 1808, and 
Waterbury was his first parish. His daughter, Mrs. William Rus- 
sell, the mother of Dr. Francis T. Russell, in a letter addressed to 
the present writer, some years since, spoke of the cordiality and 
hospitality with which he and his family were received in the 
parish. But she added: 

After successive years of a faithful pastorate, lie was stricken with a contagious 
fever to which he had been exposed during a season of unusual sickness. He did 
not recover for some months, and was left with an ulcer in his side which eventu- 
ally made it necessary for him to obtain a minister in his place. Mr. Nettleton, 
the distinguished revival preacher — then on a circuit near Waterbury — was read}'- 
to come at my father's request. During his stay with our family and the people, 
my father was under the care of a surgeon in Canton (Conn.), where he was obliged 
to remain some months on account of a surgical operation and for his recovery 
after. 

Dr. Nettleton's visit, here referred to, resulted in an extensive 
" old-fashioned revival" — the most wide-spread and important that 
has occured in the history of the Waterbury churches. At the time 
of Mr. Wood's coming, there had not been an addition to the church, 
except by letters of dismission from other churches, in six years. 
During the seven years preceding Nettleton's engagement twenty 
■oersons had been received on profession of their faith. The " mor- 
tal sickness" which prevailed in the spring and summer of 1815 
failed to make any marked impression on the religious condition of 
the community. " Whatever serious effects," said a writer in the 
Religious Intelligencer 2^ the time, "might be expected to arise from 
the heavy judgments with which we had been visited, they appeared 
to be lost upon us. Vice, immorality and irreligion appeared to 
gain additional strength, and the cloud that overshadowed us in a 
moral point of view appeared fraught with tenfold darkness." In 
the following February, however, tokens of religious interest began 
to appear, and these continued to increase for some months. A 
man who had been "an open opposer " of religion became converted, 
and in June special meetings for prayer began to be held. Soon 



*The "clergy"! Surely now the time was drawing near when the meeting-house might be called 
' church " without danger of a revolution. 



I 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 627 

afterward the Rev. Lyman Beecher of Litchfield and the Rev. Mr. 
Nettleton spent a vSunday with the church, and arrangements were 
made with Mr. Nettleton to begin "a series of meetings." He con- 
tinued his labors in Waterbury for several months, and with re- 
markable results. " The work became very extensive and powerful; 
it embraced all ages from youth to gray hairs. In many instances 
whole families came under deep conviction." Tangible results fol- 
lowed immediately. The records show that on the first Sunday in 
August seventeen were received to the church, in October nine, in 
February (1817) seventy-one, in April fourteen, and in June seven, 
making a total of 118, of whom no were regarded at the time as 
"fruits of the revival."* 

These, however, were not the only results of the movement 
which had taken place in the church and the community. There 
were results of a less definite kind, some of which were good, others 
evil; but besides these there were certain "institutions" which 
came into being about this time, the origin of which is naturally 
associated with the revival, and the value of which has been very 
great in the later life of the parish. These are the Sunday school, 
the church prayer-meeting, the Ladies' Benevolent society and an 
auxiliary missionary society. The missionary society has long been 
extinct, but for some years it had a flourishing life in the First 
church. At a meeting of the church, September 24, 1820, it was 
agreed to "unite with the other churches of the consociation in a 
constitution for a society auxiliary to the American Board of Com- 
missioners for Foreign Missions." The society had two branches in 
Waterbury, one for men and the other for women, and from a pub- 
lished "report" which has survived, it appears that such men as 
Bennet Bronson, Elijah Hotchkiss, James Brown, Aaron Benedict 
and S. B. Minor, and such women as Mrs. Israel Coe, Mrs. Ruth 
Humiston and Mrs. Edward Scovill, were the officers, and that there 
was besides a large corps of collectors.f The Ladies' Benevolent 
society was in its origin more definitely connected with the revival. 
It was formed almost in the midst of the movement, in 1816 or 1817. 
It consisted of young women whose hearts were stirred to do some- 
thing in the line of Christian philanthropy. The object at first 



*See Dr. Bennet Tyler's " Memoir of Nettleton," pp. 90-94. In May, 1817, as the records show, sixty- 
two children were baptized in the First church on one Sunday. 

t A list of subscribers in the women's branch, extending from 1825 to 1834, has been preserved, from 
which it appears that the customary annual contribution was twenty-five cents. In 1827 the collections 
reported from Waterbury were, from the men's "association" $25.60, and from the women's $23.25, and it 
is added that "of this sum four dollars were from Mrs. Humiston, a donation to the Jews' society, and voted 
by said society for the benefit of Foreign missions," and_that " four dollars were the avails of a gold ring 
and a string of beads." 



62 8 HISTORY OF WATEEBURT. 

was the making of clothing for young men who were studying for 
the ministry, and the society continued to work for this for twenty- 
five or thirty 3^ears. The first president was the pastor's daughter, 
Ursula Wood (afterward Mrs. William Russell, whose letter was 
quoted above); the first vice-president Polly Clark (Mrs, Merlin 
Mead); the secretary Anna ]\I. Leavenworth (Mrs. Green Kendrick), 
and the treasurer Maria Clark (Mrs. John T. Baldwin). During the 
pastorate of the Rev. Henry N. Day a society auxiliary to this was 
organized on Town Plot, which was at one time more flourishing 
than the parent organization. 

The origin of the church prayer-meeting cannot be precisely 
fixed, but it certainly belongs to this period, although it had an 
intermittent life for some years afterward. As regards the vSunday 
school, however, it was not only a product of the renewed spiritual 
life of the people; its beginning is definitely indicated. It appears 
from statements quoted in Volume II (p. 582), that it did not have an 
iminterrupted existence, but there is no question that it came into 
being in 1819. In July of the previous year the church "voted to 
appoint a committee for the purpose of setting up a Sabbath 
school," and the committee reported on June 26 (1819), " that there 
should be a president, a vice-president and three directors." The 
report was adopted, and Elijah Hotchkiss was made president and 
Edward Field vice-president. Further details are given as follows, 
in a memorandum prepared in 1857 b}' Deacon E. L. Bronson: 

The Sunday school was estabUshed in the gallery of the old church by Anna M. 
Leavenworth, Polly Clai-k and Ruth W. Holmes, who were subsequently assisted 
by Candace Allen, Susan Cooke, Hulda Hitchcock and several others. It consisted 
at first of fifteen or sixteen female scholars. There was much opposition on the 
part of many of the members of the church, as the few Sunday schools they had 
then heard of were designed principally for the benefit of those who were too poor 
to avail themselves of any other opportunity of gaining instruction. The school 
was continued, however, for several years, but without any formal organization, 
and only during the summer months. The course of study and the recitations were 
confined chiefly to the Bible and the " Shorter Catechism." 

About 1822, the pastor, the Rev. Daniel Crane, gave the following notice: " Mr. 
Israel Holmes will meet the children in the West Centre school-house and instruct 
them to the best of his ability."* The school still held its sessions during the sum- 
mer months only. About 1825 it was re-established in the meeting-house, and Dea- 
con Benedict was chosen superintendent. He was succeeded by John Clark, Deacon 
P. W. Carter, for two years, and Horace Hotchkiss, after which it was continued as 
a permanent institution. But its history, preserved as it is only in the memories of 
its members, is not very definite or reliable. 



♦This was probably in 1823, as on May 2 of that year the church "voted that the subject of the instruc- 
tion of the youth is entitled to the attention of the church and that they will engage in it." The communion 
collection taken in September following was by vote " appropriated to the use of the Sabbath school." 



THE FIRST CIIUllCH TO 18;J5. 629 

Mr. Bronson's list of Sunday school superintendents, with later 
additions, is as follows : 

Elijah Hotchkiss, Israel Holmes, Aaron Benedict, John Clark, P. W. Carter, 
Horace Hotchkiss, Seth Fuller, Edward Clarke, Frederick Treadway, Nelson Hall, 
Charles Fabrique, Josiah A. Blake, Isaac R. Bronson. John S. Mitchell, Robert 
Crane, Edward L. Bronson, Ammi Giddings, Jonathan R. Crampton, William I. 
Fletcher, George W. Beach, Solon M. Terr}^, J. Henry Morrow, Silas B. Terry, 
Lester M. Camp, Wilson H. Pierce, Alexander C. Mintie, James V. Reed, Edward 
W. Goodenough. 

Mr. Wood's pastorate was brought to a close abotit the time that 
the revival culminated. Up to June, 1817, the accessions to the 
church, as already stated, were irS; in August there were no addi- 
tions, in October there was one, in the whole year 1818 only two, 
and in 1819 only one. And in the meantime a distaste had been 
developed for such preaching as Mr. Wood could furnish. "After 
a time," as Mrs. Russell states the matter, in the letter already 
quoted, " when my father resumed his office, there was less interest 
felt in his preaching than in Mr. Nettleton's (as was natural), and 
some dissatisfaction was expressed, which of course greatly dis- 
turbed my father's mind, and he was eventually dismissed." The 
vote of the church on November i, 181 7, was painfully frank: 
"Voted that this church does not approve of the preaching of the 
Rev. Luke Wood, and that under existing circumstances the mem- 
bers are of opinion that his usefulness as a gospel minister with 
them is at an end." To this action Mr. Wood replied promptly, pro- 
posing under certain reasonable conditions to call a council for his 
dismission. The council was called, and he was dismissed from the 
pastorate November 19, 1827, having labored here, amidst much 
sickness and many trials, for very nearl}^ nine years. As soon as 
his health was somewhat restored he engaged in missionary labors 
in western New York and Pennsylvania. After this he preached in 
Cheshire, Westford, Clinton and West Hartland, and in 1842 retired 
to Somers, his native town, where he spent the remainder of his 
days. He died on August 22, 185 1.* 

After Mr. Wood's dismission the church remained without a 
pastor for three years and a half, the pulpit being supplied by a 
variety of ministers. With the qualifications of the Rev. Daniel A. 
Clark, who had recently come here to open a school (see Vol. II, 
p. 537), the people were so well satisfied that they extended to him 
a unanimous call, early in 1820, but it was not accepted, and more 



* The Congregational Joicyjial of February 4, 1852 (published at Concord, N. H.), contains an obituary- 
notice filling three columns, devoted chiefly to an account of Mr. Wood's personal characteristics. 



630 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

than a year elapsed ere another candidate was found upon whom they 
could unite. He appeared in the person of the Rev. Daniel Crane, 
and "at a church meeting legally warned, and opened by prayer," 
on May 28, 1821, he was invited to take the pastoral charge. The 
society "concurred," voting a salary of $450 a year, with the use of 
the so-called parsonage lot, and he was installed on July 3. 

He was the son of Joseph and Hannah Crane, and was born in 
Cranetown (now Montclair), N. J., April 13, 1778. He graduated 
from Princeton college in 1797, and afterward studied theology 
under the Rev. Amzi Armstrong of Mendham, N^. J. He married 
Hannah, daughter of Dr. Matthias Pierson of Orange, N. J., by 
whom he had two children, Eleazar and Abby. At the time of his 
coming to Waterbury, his son was about twenty years of age and 
his daughter a year or two younger. 

With one exception, Mr. Crane's pastorate was the shortest in 
the histor)^ of the parish, and if we may judge from the records it 
was almost destitute of incidents worthy of mention. Its pecuni- 
ary condition — partly, perhaps, as a result of being so long without 
pastoral care — was very unfavorable. The attempt had been made 
to siii the pews, at first for $7000 and then for $5000, and, that plan 
proving a failure, to lease them for two years, then for one year, 
then to lease a part of them; and finally the old seating plan was 
resorted to, without satisfaction, and another plan was tried, — "age 
only to be considered and no one degraded"; then again, to seat 
according to "list and age," every year to count for $20. But 
neither plan nor device satisfied the people. In 1820 pews might 
be leased for two years. In 182 1, in order to raise a salary for the 
support of preaching, pews might be leased for one year. In 1822 
they went back to seating the meeting-house, but this time by "list" 
exclusively. In 1824, they were again leased and might be taken 
by persons not belonging to the society. The spiritual life of the 
parish was also at a low ebb. It is true that in November, 1820, 
eight persons united with the church on profession of faith, but 
there was nothing else to indicate that the reaction which had set 
in so soon after the Nettleton revival did not still continue. Early 
in Mr. Crane's pastorate seven were " added to the church," but 
these, with five received at later dates, were all who were admitted 
on profession during his three years' ministry. 

The one notable thing in the history of the period is the serious 
rupture and prolonged conflict between the pastor's family and one 
of his leading parishioners, John Clark. Mr. Clark was a man of 
intelligence and cultivation (a graduate of Yale college in the class 
of 1806), and the conflict which took place must have seriously 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 631 

affected the peace and well-being" of the chnrch, if not of the entire 
community. The occasion of the trouble was a negro servant whom 
Mr. Crane had brought with him from New Jersey, and whom Mr. 
Clark hired to do work in his home. It seemed difficult for Mr. 
Crane to relinquish his claim upon the girl, and the result was a 
collision of claims and opinions and an acrimonious quarrel. The 
matter came before the church on January 2, 1824, when a commit- 
tee was appointed to confer with Mr. Clark respecting the difficulty 
between him and the pastor. Two weeks later a definite complaint 
was made against Mr. Clark, and on February 24 the matter was 
submitted to the consociation. The difficulty was not healed, and 
three months afterward the church voted " to withdraw our fellow- 
ship and watch from our brother John Clark." 

The healing of this breach, so far as Mr. Clark and the church 
were concerned, is related in Volume II, page 582. But in the mean- 
time Mr. Crane's hold upon the parish had been loosened, blatters 
took such shape that on January 4, 1825, the society by vote offered 
Mr. Crane the sum of $100 on condition of his being dismissed 
before May i. The church, in April, voted to call the consociation 
to dissolve the pastoral connection between Mr. Crane and the 
people. The consociation met on April 25, and after due delibera- 
tion reached the following result: 

Voted unanimously that in consequence of the difficulties which have arisen in 
the society the dismission of Mr. Crane is expedient, and that he is hereby dis- 
missed from his connection with the church and society in Waterbury. We are 
happy to find on inquiry that nothing has occurred which is in the smallest degree 
injurious to the moral or ministerial character of Mr. Crane, and we do cheerfully 
and cordially recommend him to the churches as an able minister of the gospel. 
We deeply lament those unhappy divisions which have deprived the church in this 
place of their pastor, and pray the great Head of the Church to unite their hearts 
in love, and to furnish them with another pastor who may build them up in the 
faith and lead them in the way of salvation. 

The answer to this prayer was delayed for nearly six years. Mr. 
Crane removed from Waterbury to a pastorate in Fishkill, N. Y., 
and from there after some years to Chester, N. Y. On leaving 
Chester he bought a farm near Cornwall-on-Hudson, and for the 
remainder of his life devoted his attention largely to the cultiva- 
tion of his land. He discontinued preaching, except as an occa- 
sional supply for the Rev. Jonathan vStillman of Cornwall, whose 
church he attended in that place. When he went to Cornwall his 
wife was still living, although she had been long an invalid. His 
son died many years ago, leaving a family of children, only one of 
whom (a daughter, Mary) survives. His daughter married a prom- 
inent citizen of Cornwall and died childless. Mr. Crane took a deep 



(>32 HISTORT OF WATERBURY. 

interest in questions of the day, whether pertaining to church or 
state. He was an uncompromising- abolitionist, and in 1844 he and 
three other citizens cast the first anti-slavery votes ever polled in 
Cornwall. " He was," says an old friend, "a man of sterling char- 
acter, whose sincerity and earnestness never failed to impress men, 
whether in the pulpit or in society." He died at his home in Corn- 
wall in 1 86 1. 

The further history of the First church is given in Chapters 
XXXH and XXXIII of the second volume. 

SAMUEL HOPKINS, I). D. 

Samuel Hopkins, the eldest son of Timothy and Mary (Judd) 
Hopkins, was born in Waterbury, Sunday, vSeptember 17, 172 1. He 
says, in his autobiography: "As soon as I was capable of under- 
standing and attending to it, I was told that my father, when he 
was informed that he had a son born to him, said, if the child 
should live he would give him a public education, that he might be 
a minister or a Sabbath day man, alluding to my being born on the 
vSabbath." This design was abandoned for a time, as the boy 
seemed to have no inclination to study, preferring to labor on the 
farm at home. When about fourteen years of age, however, a 
change came over him in this respect. His father was quick to 
perceive it, and placed him with the Rev. John Graham of Wood- 
bury, under whose tuition he prepared for college and successfully 
passed the Yale examinations in September, 1737. The subjects to 
which attention was at that time chiefly directed were logic, math- 
ematics and such other studies as tended to develope the students 
into profound philosophers, but not graceful and accomplished 
scholars, to foster individuality of thought, but not felicity of 
expression. During the early part of his connection with the col- 
lege, he made a public profession of religion in Waterbury, includ- 
ing, of course, acceptance of the Calvinistic doctrines. Afterward, 
however, he doubted the genuineness of his conversion and was 
much moved and depressed by sermons which he heard from 
Whitefield, Tennant and Jonathan Edwards, on the occasion of 
visits made by these men to the college. Indeed he was so deeply 
affected by Mr. Edwards's celebrated sermon on "The Trial of the 
Spirits " that he resolved to go to him, and beg to be allowed to 
become an inmate of his home when his college days should end. 
Immediately after taking his degree, in September, 1741, he 
returned to Waterbury, and spent three months in retirement.* 
At the end of that time he set out for Mr. Edwards's home, in 

* See Miss Prichard's vivid portraiture, on pp. 366, 367. 



THE FIRST CIIUBCII TO 1825. 633 

Northampton, where he was very kindly received by the celebrated 
divine and his wife. After he had spent some iiionths tinder their 
roof, his religious views became clearer and more satisfactory, and 
on April 29, 1743, he returned again to Waterbury, and was here 
duly licensed to preach the gospel. In the autumn of the same 
year he supplied the pulpit of Mr. Bellamy, in Bethlehem, for some 
weeks, while the latter made a short preaching tour. In December 
he accepted an invitation to preach in Simsbury and remained in 
that place until the following May. He then returned to North- 
ampton, where he opened a school, and continued at the same time 
his theological studies. But after a few weeks he was compelled to 
seek a change of residence on account of severe rheumatic trou- 
bles. He was evidently regarded as a man of promise, for he had 
an unusual number of invitations to preach with a view to settle- 
ment, and it was considered a proof of great disinterestedness 
when he accepted an invitation to preach at Housatonick (now 
Great Barrington). He settled there in 1743. 

Soon after his ordination the French and Indian war broke out, 
and he took a deep interest in it, even shouldering his musket and 
joining scouting parties on occasions. During the next seven years 
he lost by death his mother, his infant brother, his father and two 
sisters. He took upon himself the care and education of his three 
remaining brothers, one of whom— James, a young man of great 
promise, died before he had completed his course at college. Mr. 
Hopkins seems to have been unfortunate in his matrimonial enter- 
prises, for we read of two instances in which at the critical moment 
a more fortunate suitor was preferred before him, and he was 
forced to relinquish the object of his hopes. At length, however, 
he succeeded in capturing the affections of Joanna, daughter of 
Moses Ingersoll of Great Barrington, who became his wife January 
13, 1748, and was the mother of his eight children, all of them born 
in that place. 

He continued his ministry at Housatonick in spite of war, famine, 
meagre supplies and the opposition of enemies for twenty-five years. 
At the end of that time his strong sympathy with the Whig 
party aroused so much feeling among his Tory parishioners that 
he felt his usefulness to be at an end, and called upon his people 
to unite with him in sumtnoning a council to dissolve their con- 
nection. After his dismission he preached for a time in Canaan. 
During the April and May of 1769 he officiated at the Old South 
church in Boston, then spent several weeks preaching in Topsham, 
Me., where he was invited to settle. He thought it better, however, 
to accept instead an invitation to Newport, R. I. The congregation 



'34 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



were so pleased with his ministrations that they called him to be 
their pastor. While he was giving- this matter his thoughtful con- 
sideration, the minds of the people were inflamed against him by a 
sarcastic pamphlet which was circulated among them, so that when 




^//7/^C^t 




he was ready to give a favorable answer to the church cominittee, 
he was met with a request to withhold his communication until the 
opposition had subsided. Shortly afterward a vote was passed, by 
thirty-six against thirty-three, that they did not want his services. 
When this fact was communicated to him he quietly inquired 



TEE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 635 

whether, if there was no supply engaged, he might fill the pulpit 
on the following Sunday. This request being granted he preached 
a discourse which so affected the congregation that at a church 
meeting on March 26, 1770, his call was renewed almost unani- 
mously. The period which followed in Newport, which Mr. Hop- 
kins calls " the sunniest period of his ministerial life," lasted until 
Deceinber, 1776. General Clinton and Lord Percy at that time took 
possession of the town, and Mr. Hopkins and the other Whig inhab- 
itants were forced to fly. During the next four years he labored in 
Connecticut and Massachusetts, awaiting the day when it would be 
possible to return to the then desolate Newport. His meeting- 
house was used as barracks by the invaders; the pulpit, the pews 
and the windows had been demolished, and the bell carried off; but 
in spite of a flattering call to Middleborough, Mass., with the prom- 
ise of a generous salary, he preferred to labor in penury with the 
church and congregation which he loved, and he remained with 
them until the day of his death. 

Mr. Hopkins found in Newport his second wife, Elizabeth West, 
a woman of great intellectual gifts, who had been the principal of 
a famous boarding-school for girls in that town. He married her 
September 16, 1794. In 1790 Brown university conferred upon him 
the degree of D. D. Nine years later he had a paralytic attack 
which affected his speech, but did not disturb his mental faculties. 
He so far recovered as to resume his parochial duties, and preached 
until October 16, 1803, when he delivered his last sermon during a 
revival in his church. A few hours after this he was seized with 
an apopletic fit, and although he regained consciousness he never 
rallied, but failed gradually until December 20, following, when he 
died quietly at his own home. 

Dr. Hopkins occupied a peculiar position among the New Eng- 
land theologians of the eighteenth century. He represented a great 
theological transition. He stood midway between his friend and 
teacher, Jonathan Edwards, and the more modern and fast advanc- 
ing school of "■ humanists " who served to menace the whole struc- 
ture of old established New England beliefs. At first he attempted, 
in the spirit of Edwards's teaching, to answer the inquiries of those 
who were brooding with dissatisfaction over questions raised, but 
not settled in the works of that eminent divine. But he had under- 
taken an impossible task, — " to make Calvinism a consistent intel- 
lectual system, impregnable to assault from the reason." He came 
gradually to differ from Edwards on many important points. 

He rejected, foi" example, the dualism in the divine nature between justice and 
love. From the time of Calvin onward it had been held that love redeems the elect, 
while justice punishes the reprobates. No greater step could have been taken than 



636 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

to maintain, as Hopkins did, that the essence of Deity was love which extended to 
universal being. But when it was attempted to incorporate this truth with the 
tenets of Calvinism, when it appeared that the divine love to universal being was 
sending to eternal perdition the great majority of those then living, the situation 
was even worse than before. One could possibly endure that justice should bear 
the brunt of so awful a necessity, but that the essence of divine love should require 
it, seemed like a caricature and mockery. It was impossible to combine the new 
statement with the inhumanity of the old system without leading to a result incon- 
gruous beyond description. It is evident, however, that Hopkins felt from a dis- 
tance the coming humanitarianism which was to change the face of human 
thought.* 

In trjnng to reconcile the dogmas of tmcomproniising' Calvinism 
with the teachings of his own kindly heart, he was continually led 
into these contradictions and inconsistencies. He preached and 
published a series of sermons with the title, " Sin through Divine 
Interposition an Advantage to the Universe, yet this no Excuse for 
Sin or Encouragement to it." Again, he maintained simultaneously 
the doctrine of the supremac}' of the divine will, and the theory of 
voluntary freedom in the human being. And we must not omit 
to mention what is known as the chief characteristic of the Hop- 
kinsian theology, the doctrine of disinterested submission, as it is 
called, or "a willingness to be damned," as the last and highest test 
of spiritual excellence. 

But with his ruggedness and inconsistencies, with his eccentric- 
ities and lack of polish, there was combined so much manly integ- 
rity, so profound and conscientious a seeking after truth, so earnest 
love for his Maker and his fellow man as to make the whole char- 
acter both grand and admirable, and give its cause to be proud to 
point to Samtiel Hopkins as one of the sons of Waterbury.f 

OTHER EARLY .MINISTERS RAISED UP IN THE FIRST CHURCH. 

Jonathan Judd, son of Captain William and Mary (Root) Judd, 
and grandson of Deacon (and Captain) Thomas Judd, was born in 
Waterbury, October 4, 17 19. He was first-cousin of the Rev. Dr. 
Samuel Hopkins, and in college was his classmate and his bosom 
friend. He graduated from Yale in 1741, and became the first min- 
ister of the second parish of Northampton, Mass., now the town of 
Southampton. A church was gathered there in 1743 and he was 



♦Professor A. V. G. Allen in " The Transition in New England Theology," At/ajiiic Monthly, Vol. 
LXVIII, p. 771 (December, 1851). The article is a luminous statement of Hopkins's place in the great theo- 
logical transition which has been going on for a century past in New England and elsewhere. See also Dr. 
William E. Channing's reminiscences and estimate of him, in Vol. IV, of his " Works." pp. 344, 347-354; also 
a sketch in the Congregational Quarterly, Vol. VI, pp. 1-8, by the Rev. Lyman Whiting. 

+ For Dr. Hopkins's place in literature see Vol. II, p. 953. The most important biography of him — that 
by Professor Park — is there referred to. 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 637 

ordained June 8 of that year, and filled the office of pastor for sixty 
years. He and his cousin, Dr. Hopkins, were correspondents for 
a long time, but an alienation of feeling, followed by non-inter- 
course, took place in consequence of a difference in theological 
views. By direction of his will his sermons, to the number of 
nearly 3000, were burned; bnt two or three had been published. 
He died July 28, 1803. 

On November 28, 1743, Mr. Judd married vSilence, daughter of 
Captain Jonathan Sheldon of Sheffield. His youngest son was the 
father of the Rev. Sylvester Judd of Augusta, Me., who was the 
author of the once-famous novel " Margaret," and of other works of 
merit. 

Daniel Hopkins, D. D., a younger brother of the Rev. Dr. Sam- 
uel Hopkins, was born October 16, 1734. He pursued his prepara- 
tory studies with his brother, and graduated from Yale college in 
1758, with the highest honors. His theological studies were pur- 
sued under his brother's direction, and his brother's distinctive 
views were adopted by him and earnestly advocated. He was 
licensed to preach by the New Haven association of ministers, and 
soon afterward took charge of a parish in Halifax, Nova Scotia. 
On account of failing health he gave up preaching for a period of 
eight years, during which he was occupied in travelling and in 
manual labor. In 1766 he was invited to preach in the Third Con- 
gregational society of Salem, Mass., and after eight years became 
the settled pastor of the church. 

Mr. Hopkins was deeply interested in the early struggles of the 
colonies for independence, and was chosen in 1775 a member of the 
Provincial Congress. In 1778 "he was elected a member of the 
Conventional Government, and served faithfully and honorably." 
In the meantime a disruption took place in the Third church in 
Salem. The majority became Presbyterians, while the Congrega- 
tional minority, recognized by an ecclesiastical council as the origi- 
nal Third church, adhered to Mr. Hopkins. He was ordained over 
this church on November 18, 1778, and continued its sole pastor 
until 1804, when a colleague was provided. He received the degree 
of D. D. from Dartmouth college in 1809. 

Dr. Hopkins has been described as "a discriminating and inter- 
esting preacher." In his social intercourse he was distinguished by 
affability and courtesy. " His tall and manly figure, surmounted 
by a high, triangular hat, gave such dignity and grace to his move- 
ments that no man who walked the streets was looked at with more 
respect and veneration. The remark was often made that in his 
appearance and bearing he strikingly resembled Washington." In 



638 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



the latter part of his life he became much interested in benevolent 
enterprises. He took an active part in the founding of the Massa- 
chusetts Missionary society, and for the last two years of his life 
was its president. He published two sermons, one on the death of 
Washington in 1800, and the other at the dedication of the New 
South meeting-house in Salem in 1805. 

He married, in 1771, Susanna, daughter of John vSaunders of 
Salem, by whom he had six children. He died, after a distressing 
illness, December 14, 1814. 

Benoni Upson, D. D., was born in the " Farmington part" of 
what is now Wolcott, February 14, 1750. His father was Thomas, 
the grandson of Stephen Upson, and his mother was Hannah Hop- 
kins of Waterbury, sister of the Rev. Dr. Samuel Hopkins. He 
graduated at Yale college in 1776, and was ordained pastor of the 
church in Kensington, April 21, 1779. He remained here until the 
close of his life, having been furnished during his later years with 
a colleague in the pastorate. In August, 1778, he married Li via 
Hopkins, daughter of Joseph Hopkins, Esq., of Waterbury, by whom 
he had eight children. In September, 1809, he was made a member 
of the corporation of Yale college, and in 181 7 received from his 
Alma Mater the degree of D. D. In an obituary notice published 
in the Religious Intelligencer, Vol. XI, p. 415 (November 25, 1826), he 
is described as " a pious, affectionate and discreet pastor, tender 
and highly beloved in the conjugal and parental relations, endeared 
to a numerous circle of acquaintance, and distinguished for urbanity 
of manners, hospitality and benevolence." He died November 13, 
1826. (See, further, Orcutt's History of Wolcott, p. 354.) 

Benjamin Wooster, son of Wait and Phebe (Warner) Wooster, 
was born in Waterbury, October 29, 1762. He was a soldier in the 
war of the Revolution. He graduated from Yale college in 1790, 
and studied theology with the Rev. Dr. Edwards of New Haven. 
After being licensed to preach, he occupied himself for a time in 
missionary labor; but in 1797 was ordained pastor of the church in 
Cornwall, A-^t. He gave up his charge in 1802, and spent three years 
in the service of the Berkshire Missionary society. On July 24, 
1805, he was installed in Fairfield, Vt., and labored assiduously not 
only in his own parish but in the surrounding country, until bodily 
infirmity compelled him, in 1833, to discontinue his work. During 
this time he was once a representative to the General Assembly of 
the state, and twice a member of the "Septennial Convention con- 
vened by the Board of Censors." He was opposed to the war of 
1812-14, but in 1814, when the British came up Lake Champlain, he 
headed a company of volunteers, although he was over fifty years 



THE FIRST CHURCH TO 1825. 639 

old, and " on the very da}^ he was to preach a preparatory lecture " 
marched for Plattsburg. " For this patriotism Governor Tompkins, 
of New York, sent him a magnificent Bible, with a letter written on 
the fly leaf." Mr. Wooster was a man of gigantic stature, as well 
as of great wit and readiness of repartee. 

He married Sarah, daughter of Israel Harris. vShe died in 1824, 
leaving three daughters and a son. Mr. Wooster died at vSt. Albans, 
Vt., February 18, 1840.* 

Aaron Button, the youngest of the nine children of Thomas 
and Anne (Rice) Button, was born in that part of Waterbury which 
is now Watertown, May 21, 1780. He pursued his classical studies 
under the direction of the Rev. Azel Backus of Bethlehem, gradu- 
ated at Yale college in 1803, was instructed in theology by Presi- 
dent Bwight, and was ordained Becember 10, 1805, as pastor 
of the First church and society in Guilford. He resigned his 
charge June 8, 1842, mainly on account of a difference of opinion 
between himself and his people on the subject of slavery. He 
was a tnember of the corporation of Yale college from 1825 until 
his decease. 

A few months after his separation from his people, he went, in 
the service of the Home Missionary society, to Iowa (then a terri- 
tory), and was invited to settle over the the church and society of 
Burlington. When about to return to New England, to make 
arrangements for a permanent removal to the west, he was taken 
sick. He reached New Haven with difficulty, and had a long and 
dangerous illness, from which he never completely recovered. He 
died in June, 1849, and was buried in the midst of his former people 
in Guilford. 

Mr. Button was an earnest, faithful and fearless man, respected 
among the churches, and true in all the relations of life. He was an 
early and consistent friend of temperance and emancipation, and 
was ready to suffer, if need be, in the discharge of what he esteemed 
his duty. He published a few sermons, and was a contributor to 
the Christian Spectator. 

His wife, Boreas (daughter of Samuel Southmayd of Water- 
town), whom he married in April, 1806, died in September, 1841. 
Their son, the Rev. Samuel William Southmayd Button, B. B., a 
graduate of Yale college in 1833, was pastor of the United society 
(the North church) of New Haven, from 1838 to 1866. He died in 

♦See Sprague's "Annals of the American Pulpit," Vol. I, p. 642, note; also " Butleriana," by James 
Davie Butler, Albany, 1888. Sprague makes the year of Mr. Wooster's death 1843 ; the date above is Mr. 
Butler's. The letter above referred to was published in Niles's Register, Vol. VIII, p. 309. A biographical 
sermon concerning him, by the Rev. A. W. Wild, has been published. 



640 



HItiTOUY OF WATERBUIIY. 



1866, aged fifty-one years. Another son, Aaron Rice Button, a 
graduate of Yale in 1837 and a lawyer in Washington, D. C, died 
May 4, i8S5,aged sixty-nine. Their daughter, Mary Button, so long 
a teacher of a widely known school for girls in New Haven, died 
in 188S. 

THE CHURCH IN SALEM SOCIETY. 

Naugatuck was the last child to leave Waterbury, having 
remained at home until 1844. But it is 130 years since "Stephen 
Hopkins and others, inhabitants of the first society in Waterbury," 
asked the General Assembly to grant them " a winter parish for 
four months in the year, namely the months of Becember, January, 
February and March." The original grant, with the autograph of 
George Wyllys, secretary, which was sent to Judds Meadow, has 
been preserved. It is for the term of three years from the rising 
of that Assembly (October term, 1765). The bounds of the parish 
were in brief as follows: 

They began at Long Land on the north, and continued east across the Walling- 
ford line far enough to " comprehend" the first tier of lots in that township, then 
ran south to New Haven bounds; from thence west to the three trees called the 
Three Brothers; thence south in the line between Milford and New Haven to Leba- 
non brook; from thence west to Naugatuck river to where Spruce brook empties 
into the river on the west side; from thence to the highway where it turns south 
by Thomas Osborn's lot to Derby; from thence to Meshadock brook where Moss's 
road crosses to Westbury; from thence east to the Long Land. 

The land within the above bounds belonging to Oxford society was 
excluded, also " Samuel Porter and his lands." 

At the expiration of the three years Gideon Hickcox and other 
inhabitants asked for an extension of the privileges formerly 
granted. The General Assembly renewed the grant with a few 
changes in the bounds, the chief one being that the eastern bound 
did not include the first tier of lots in Wallingford. This grant 
was to continue according to the pleasure of the Assembly, and per- 
mitted the inhabitants to hold service at Judds Meadow five months 
in the year. 

Of the period of the winter parish, from 1765 to 176S, it is not 

known that any records remain. vStephen Hopkins probably made 

provision for the services, obtained the ministers and kept their 

receipts. The following is the earliest evidence extant of the 

services of a minister: 

New Haven, Agusts 25, 1769. 

Then Received of the Ccmimittee of Judds ^leddow Winter parish the sum of 
sixteen pounds, on the account of my Son's public labours among them. 

Samuel Munson. 



£ s. 


d 


2724 4 





1757 is 


6 


1526 15 





3855 13 


9 



THE CHURCH AND SOCIETY IN SALEM. 641 

There is also an autograph letter written from wSpringfield in 1770, 
and signed by Nathan Hale, in which the writer says: 

I went from the Commencement to my Father's in Sijring-field. I am in such a 
state as to my Health tliat tliere is no probabiUty that I shall be able to serve you 
this winter. I have not been able to preach but one half day since the Commence- 
ment and that was half the next Sabbath after I saw you. 

The letter is addressed: "To Mr. Hotchkiss, at Jndds Meadow in 
Waterbiiry." 

In 1767 "the list of the Estate of the InhalDitants of the First 
Society, exchisive of the Church of England, was ^9854-11-3." This 
amount, divided as it then was for winter preaching, was as follows: 

Southern Winter Parish (Judds Meadow), 

Western Winter Parish (Middlebury), .... 

Eastern Memorial (Farmingbury), 

Leaving for the First Society, ..... 

Testimony of Ezra Bronson. 
At the October term of the Assembly in 1772, the members of the 
" Southern Winter Parish " petitioned for society privileges. 
" Bushnel Bostwick, Thomas Darling and James Wadsworth, jun"", 
Escf'V' were commissioned to hear the jjetitioners and the First 
society, and two of them, having conferred with the third, sent the 
following letter, the autograph of which has been preserved: 

New Haven, Oct. 2'5d, 1772 
Gentn- 

On conferring with Mr. Darling touching your Memorial, we can see no 

Prospect of viewing your Circumstances so as to be able to make a Report to the 

Assembly before it riseth, if we should attempt it on Mondaj^ next — wherefore we 

think it more adviseable to postpone the Time to the 23d Day of Novem'" next at 

which time we purpose to meet (if you have no Objections) when all Parties will 

have full Opportunity to be heard which may probably be much more agreeable to 

them as well as to us as we are very desireous to attend the Assembly which will 

undoubtedly rise the next week. 

We are Gentl" your 

Huni'^' sev'* 

BusHNELL Bostwick, 

Capt. John Lewis, James Wadsworth, Juk- 

& 

Capt. Gideon Hotchkiss. 

The above gentlemen, when the time came, reported that it was 
convenient and necessary that a new society should be made. 
Accordingly the Assembly resolved that the inhabitants living 
within the following limits should be made and constituted a dis- 
tinct ecclesiastical society, to be known and called by the name of 
Salem: 
41 



642 



BISTORT OF WATERS URT. 



Beginning at a rock near the road from the town plat in Waterbury to New 
Haven, distant from the meeting-house in Waterbury two miles, one half and sixty 
rods, called the Mile rock, and thence to run east one degree and thirty minutes 
south to Wallingford line; thence in said line to the tree called the Three Brothers, 
thence south to the Beacon Cap, thence to the southeast corner of a farm formerly 
belonging to James Richards [Prichard] lying on Beacon hill, thence west to the 
mouth of the Great Spruce brook the west side of Naugatuck river, thence keeping 
the brook westwardly to the mouth of the brook that comes off from Red Oak hill, 
thence northwesterly to the place where Moss's road crosses Derby line, thence 
northwardly in said road to Enos Gunn's dwelling-house, thence a north line so far 
as to intersect a west line from said Mile rock. 

It may be interestitig- to the present generation to know exactly 
how much money was expended by the Judds Meadow men in get- 
tine the above act passed, and to whom it was paid: 

^ s. d. 
May, 1772, an account of money at Hartford paid out at the 

Assembly to take care of the memorial, . . . . o 7 10 
October, 1772, money paid out to Mr. Hillhouse, . . . 060 

For money paid out, 068 

For money paid at New Haven, o o 11 

May, 1773, paid to Mr. Hillhouse, 060 

= For money paid out at Hartford 0137 

For money paid out agoing to Westfield o i 8 

For money paid to Mr. Hillhouse, 060 

For money paid to have the memorial served, . . . 016 

2 10 2 
The first society meeting was held on the first Monday in June, 
1773. Captain Gideon Hotchkiss was chosen moderator; Ashbel 
Porter clerk ; for society's committee, Captain Gideon Hotchkiss, 
Captain John Lewis, Stephen Hopkins,* Samuel Lewis, Esq., and 
Captain vSamuel Porter. At this meeting a "rate " of two pence on 
the pound was laid (John Hopkins collector). At the next meeting, 
m December, Gideon Hickox, J. Lewis, Jr., and John Hopkins 
were added to the society's committee, and a school committee con- 
sisting of Isaac Judd, Israel Terrill and Ashbel Porter, was 
appointed. It was voted that "the school be paid by the rate, what 
the publick money doth not pay," with Thomas Porter, Jr., the col- 
lector, and a tax of five pence on the pound was laid. In 1774 
Daniel Warner was chosen grave digger. In 1774, also, the first 
attempt to secure stated ministrations of the gospel was made. In 
August, Mr. Remily was invited to preach on probation; in Octo- 
ber, Mr. Miles was called for settlement; in April, of 1776, the Rev. 
Abraham Camp was invited on probation; in March, 1777, the Rev. 
Mr. Barker received the same invitation; in January, 1781, it was 
decided to give a call to the Rev. Medad Rogers. 

*The elder Stephen Hopkins, who petitioned for a Winter Parish in 1765, had died in 1769. 



THE CHURCH AND SOCIETY IN SALEM. 643 

During- all these years we must not forget the great eonflict that 
was reducing the life-forces of the country, the personal property 
of its people and even the products of their soil. It is not sur- 
prising that Judds Meadow obtained no settled minister in those 
years of stress of war; but it is exceedingly creditable to its people 
that they kept on in their endeavors to obtain one, and also that 
their coming meeting-house grew in their thoughts and aspira- 
tions. Even in 1776, they took a step forward in that direction. 
During all this period, 1773-1781, no church was organized. The 
church waited for a minister, perhaps; at all events its formal 
organization took place February 22, 1781, "in the presence and by 
the advice and assistance of Mark Leavenworth, Benjamin Trum- 
bull and Alexander GiUet." The original members of this church 
were: 

j Gideon Hickox, Mrs. Philena Hickox. 

( Mrs. vSarah Hickox, (wife of Gideon Hickox, Jr.), 

j Samuel Lewis, Mrs. Sarah Smith, 

( Mrs. Eunice Lewis, (wife of Austin Smith, Jr.1, 

j Amos Osborn, John Lewis, 

i Mrs. Ehzabeth Osborn, Enoch Scott, 

jAshbel Porter, Samuel Porter, 

i Mrs. Hannah Porter, Samuel Scott, 

Gideon Hickox, Jr., Samuel Hickox.* 

When the site for the meeting-house came under consideration 
there was a wide difference of opinion as to its proposed location. 
The territory now within the town of Prospect held a considerable 
proportion of the inhabitants of the society, who naturally wished 
the meeting-house to be as near to their hills as might be, but they, 
like their predecessors in other societies, submitted to arbitration. 
The Court's committee set the stake high on the hill eastward of 
the river, on land of Gideon Hickox. On this land, without having 
obtained a title to it, the meeting-house was built by the church 
and society. As the years go on, the following work which one 
man did for this first meeting-house in Naugatuck, will not lose 
its interest : 

May, 1782, for work done towards the Meeting-House smce the two-penny Rate. 

For going to Goshen for a lode of clabords. 

For carting timber a day. 

For a day to West Haven to get shells. 

For carting a load of shells and paid for them. 

For 2 days making pins [for the frame]. 

For my cart to cart stones a day, by Philip. 

* For some reason (perhaps he was on service in the war). Captain Gideon Hotchkiss was not present. 
He, however, was admitted to fellowship the next month. 



644 



HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 



The above and other charges are succeeded by the following: 

December 20, 17S2— Paid twenty pounds toward the Meeting-House which was 
my signment. Beside what I found raising. 

June 17, 17S2. Things that I provided for the Raising of the iSIeeting-House 
and Steeple: 

For a Barrel of Sider. 

For a Bushel of Ingen Meal. 

For Haifa Bushel of Malt. 

About nine pounds of salt pork. 

About thirty pounds of fresh pork. 

For two the best sheep I had. 

It was said in 1876 by the Rev. Charles S. Sherman in his memo- 
rial discourse (delivered at Naugatuck in commemoration of our 
national centennial) that there were no records showing when the 
building was completed, but an old account book has delivered up 
the secret in the following words: 

Monday June 17: 17S2. This day we laid the sills of the Meeting-House and 
Steeple in Salem and finished Raising on Satiirday Morning ]\\ne 22: 1782. 

Thursday; November: 28: 17S2: this day we met in our new Meeting-House, it 
being a day set apart by these States for a day of publick thanksgiving. 

For all of the foregoing facts relating to the building of the 
meeting-house we are indebted to Captain Gideon Hotchkiss, one 
of the first two deacons of the church, who faithfully recorded 
them in his account book at the time of their occurrence.* 

The building seems to have been fully equipped with its " fore 
door" and "communion table" in time only for the ordination of 
the first settled pastor, of whom the account book says: 

Salem, December 4, 1784. This day we agreed with Mr. Fowler to attend His 
ordination in this place on Wednesday, the 12 day of January next. 

Wenesday: January: 12: 17S5: this day the Rev' Mr. Abraham Fowler was or- 
dained over the Church and Congregation in Salem. 

Wenesday March: 13: 1799. This day the Rev'' A"" Fowler was dismissed from 
the Church and Congregation in Salem. 

Two years after the first service was held in the meeting-house 
on the hill, on December 12, 1784, Gideon Hickox, the owner of the 
land on which it stood, conveyed it to the church and society. 

This church building remained on the hill forty-nine years. It 
had a bell in 1794 (if not earlier), at which date it was agreed to 
have the meeting-house bell rung, at the cost of the society, on 
each Sunday for all public meetings which are held at the meeting- 
house, for funerals when desired, and at nine o'clock each night, 
Saturday nights excepted. 



* Under date of April ii, 1785, he recorded: This day I measured the snow as it lies solid in the woods, 
and it is eighteen and half inches deep. 



THE CIIUEUH AND SOCIETY IN SALEM. 645 

In reg-ard to the non-heating of meeting-houses, the generally 
accepted theory is that our ancesters looked upon the proposed 
heating of them as a kind of desecration. The writer has not met 
with the slightest proof that this theory is founded on fact. The 
destruction of a meeting-house in the days before insurance com- 
panies had their origin, would have been an irreparable loss to a 
society. To have accomplished the heating of one with wood-fires, 
even had the meeting-houses been built with chimneys, would have 
been well-nigh impossible, and would have involved night service 
both before and after the day of meeting. To say that the meet- 
ing-house was of too much importance to take the risk of its burn- 
ing by having a fire in it, is undoubtedly true. 

In March of 1831 Daniel Beecher made a deed of gift to the 
society, as follows : 

For the consideration of the good will which I have to the ecclesiastical society 
of which I am a member, a piece of Land lying in Salem society a little westward 
from Salem Bridge, containing Two Roods and Ten rods [bounds here omitted], 
to be used as a public green and to erect a Meeting-House thereon for said Society 
and Church, holding the doctrine and faith and practice of the present Society and 
Church, provided that said society or any other person shall not erect any Buildmg 
or any other obstruction between the Meeting-House to be erected and the south 
line of said piece. . . . It is understood that provided s'^ society should wish 
to remove s'^ Meeting-House hereafter from s'^ land, they have liberty so to do, to 
sell s'l land and apply the avails for the benefit of s>i church and society.* 

To this land, given by Daniel Beecher in 183 1, the meeting-house 
on the hill was removed the same year. In 1853 after a service of 
seventy-one years the old meeting-house was again moved to give 
place to the present church edifice. A portion of this building is 
still in use as a store. A fire partially destroyed it in 1893. 

Mr. Abraham Fow^ler was the first settled minister. He w^as 
ordained in the meeting-house on the hill, January 12, 1785, and 
installed over a church of thirty-one members. He was dismissed 
March 13, 1799,! leaving a church that had lost at that date by 
death, it is believed, but four of its 122 members. The pastors, 
to 1844, were as follows: 

* Two months after the above deed was recorded, Daniel Beecher also gave, for " the consideration of his 
good will to the Episcopal society of Salem in Waterbury," ninety rods of land directly south of his former 
gift. It is described as "an oblong square ten rods East and West and nine rods North and South." It was 
given " for the purpose of a public Green," with restriction of building between the church then on the same, 
and the north line. Ten years later the same Daniel Beecher " for the consideration of his friendship for his 
descendants and Family connexions "—conveyed to them a plot of ground west of the Episcopal church 
'' for the purpose of a family burying Ground and no other." It was six rods and twenty links east and west 
by two rods and nineteen links north and south. 

■(•Among the scarcer pamphlets of the present day is the following: "A Farewell Sermon, delivered at 
Salem, in Waterbury, April 17, 1799, By the Rev. Abraham Fowler, late Pastor of the Church in that Society. 
Printed by George Bunce. New Haven: 1799." Another of Mr. Fowler's published sermons is referred to 
in the chapter on Masonry. 



646 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

Mr. Abraham Fowler, January 12, 1785, to March 13, 1799. 

Mr. Jabez Chadwick, December 2, iSoo, to March, 1803. 

Rev. Stephen Dodd, 1811, to April, 1817. 

Rev. Amos Pettengill, January, 1823; died August 19. 1830. 

Rev. Seth Sackett, October, 1834, to January, 1838. 

Rev. Chauncey G. Lee, January, 1838 to November, 1840. 

The deacons for the same period were: 

Samuel Lewis, 1783; died in 1788. 
Gideon Hotchkiss, 17S3; died in 1807. 
Elisha Stevens, 1788; died in 1813. 
Calvin Spencer, 1791; died in 1846. 
Truman Porter, 1813; died in 1838. 
Thaddeus Scott, 1813; died in 1832. 
Lucian F. Lewis, 1S34; removed 1853. 

Deacon Calvin Spencer, Deacon Elisha Stevens and Mr. Israel Terrill were, on 
March 27, 1803, appointed ruling elders. 

During" the sixty-three years that the Salem church was one 
of the churches of Waterbury it had a settled pastor but thirty- 
nine years. It was organized without a pastor; in 1800 it enter- 
tained, apparently without a pastor (at the house of Irijah Terrill)> 
the members of the " Consociation of the Western District of New 
Haven county," consisting of eleven reverend elders and ten dele- 
gates ; it passed, without a pastor, through the momentous period 
of religious excitement caused by the preaching of Nettleton, 
during which time eighty-two members were received into its 
old; and when, in 1831, the old church building and its congre- 
gation came together into the valley, they came without a pastor — 
for he had preceded them into the valley of death.* 

When, in the coming time, the History of Naugatuck shall be 
written, and the history of her First church shall take its place 
therein, the coming writer will doubtless search the records of 
the church and society with care, and will be rewarded with much 
valuable information — notably in regard to her sons and daughters 
who went out to settle towns in New York and Ohio, and whose 
history remains unwritten. And surely that writer will be able 
to give testimony to the patriotism of a church organized on the 
anniversary of Washington's birthday, the sills of whose first 
meeting-house were laid on the anniversary of the battle of Bunker 
Hill, and whose first service was held to give thanks that the 
Revolutionary war was virtually at an end. 

* The Rev. Amos Pettengill, who died in 1830 and was buried in Hillside cemetery. For his literary 
record see Vol. II, p. 955. 



CHAPTER XLI. 

A REACTION FROM "INDEPENDENCY" THE YEAR 1722 "BISHOP BROWN," 

IMMIGRANT— THE FIRST MISSIONARY MESSRS. ARNOI,D, MORRIS 

AND LYONS DR. MANSFIELD's LONG MINISTRY THE PARISH OF 

ST. JAMES, AFTERWARD ST. JOHN'S THE FIRST CHURCH JAMES 

SCOVIL, FIRST RECTOR REVOLUTIONARY PERIOD TRIALS FOR THE 

MINISTER AND THE PEOPLE SOLOMON BLAKESLEE AND OTHERS 

A SECOND EDIFICE, 1 796 DR. TILLOTSON BRONSON VIRGIL H. 

BARBER, S. J. ALPHEUS GEER, FROM 1S14 TO 183O ST. PETER'S, 

NORTHBURY CHRIST'S CHURCH, WESTBURY ST. MICHAEL's, NAUGA- 

TUCK. 

NEARLY all of the early Massachusetts settlers regarded them- 
selves as members of the Church of England, but they had 
evangelical leanings and were opposed to what they thought 
excessive liturgical and prelatical observances, — a reforming body 
within the church. They had, however, in this country developed 
a decided church polity of their own, and had practically become 
"Independents." The government was organized on a religious 
basis. The early towns were really churches; the minister was 
" called " in town meeting, and his support was provided for 
by town grants and a town tax. The beliefs and methods of the 
Church of England, as then practiced, were not congenial to them, 
and they were allowed as little foothold or countenance here as was 
deemed consistent with a due regard for the ultimate powers of 
the English government. Time and distance, however, while they 
emphasized and rendered possible a great divergence of faiths and 
practice in some minds, softened early prejudices, and a love and 
longing for the old church and her forms grew up in many hearts. 
Her shortcomings were forgotten, her virtues were more clearly 
seen, especially where they could be favorably contrasted with the 
deficiencies'of the New England system. In this way, or in some 
such way, a preparation for a reaction had for some time been 
going on. 

The year 1722 was a notable one in the history of the Episcopal 
Church in Connecticut. In that year Dr. Timothy Cutler, rector of 
Yale college, the Rev. Samuel Johnson, a graduate and former tutor 



648 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

of the college and at that time pastor of the Congregational church 
in West Haven, and Daniel Brown, a tutor in the college and a class- 
mate and intimate friend of Johnson's, all declared their adhesion 
to the Episcopal Church, gave up their positions and left for Eng- 
land to be ordained — there being no Bishop in this country until 
some sixty years later. On April 13, 1723, Brown died of small- 
pox in England, greatly mourned and lamented. The other two 
were duly ordained and returned to this country to pursue their 
work. 

In this same year, 1722, James Brown, a resident of West Haven, 
then about thirty-eight years of age, a cousin of the father of the 
above named Daniel Brown, and doubtless a parishioner of the 
above named Samuel Johnson, removed from West Haven to Water- 
bury. He lived at Naugatuck on the east side of the river, was a 
farmer and hotel keeper and soon became a somewhat prominent 
man in the new settlement. vSome years later he removed toW^atcr- 
town, to the place known of late years as the Captain John Bucking- 
ham place, above Oakville. 

He is said to have been the first Episcopalian in Waterbury. 
Perhaps he had been a fellow-student and investigator with his 
cousin and his pastor. He certainly sympathized with them, for his 
Episcopacy was of so pronounced a character, and his zeal so active, 
that he earned for himself the soiibricpiet of "Bishop Brown" from 
his jocular neighbors. He seems for some years to have been the 
only incumbent. 

There were, however, doubtless a few persons already here who 
knew something of the Episcopal Church and ^\ere well disposed 
towards it. Witness the following: The Rev. X. A. Welton writes, 
" Mr. Stephen Hopkins Welton has an old prayer-book containing 
the following inscription, which I copied from it myself": 

This book was first the property of my great-grandfather, Richard Welton, 
who was the first male child born of English parents in Waterbury * and one of the 
first Episcopalians in said town. At his decease it became the property of my grand- 
father, Richard Welton, Jr., and at his decease it became my property. I gave it 
to William S. H. Welton, the eldest son of my nephew, the Rev. Alanson W. Wel- 
ton, deceased. Said Samuel [szc] is the fifth generation from the original proprietor 
of this book and the sixth from the only man of this name that was ever known to 
cross the Atlantic and settle in these British Colonies. 

All the way by primcjgeniture. 

Attest: . Abi Welton. 

* See page 167. The view there expressed is confirmed by an old document recently found among the 
papers of the First church, which opens thus: " The settlement of Waterbury commenced in 1677. Rebecca 
Richason, born April 27, 1679, was the first English child born in Waterbury. John Warner, first male 
English child born in Waterbury, March 6, 1686." 



THE EPISVOPAL PARISH TO 1S30. 649 

Richard Welton, first named above, was born, according to town 
record, March, 1680, and by family tradition September 27, 1679, and 
died in 1755. So he may not have had this book until after Mr. 
Brown came here; and the possession of the book is not to be taken 
as proof of his opinion, but from the fact that he lived at the 
extreme end of the town from Mr. Brown, and that the Weltons 
Avere among the first to join with him, it seems likely that they 
were already well affected. 

It is recorded that in 1734 Mr. Johnson, then rector at Stratford, 
ascended the valley of the Naugatuck as far as Waterbury and bap- 
tised an infant son of Nathaniel Gunn.* Dr. Beardsley in his His- 
tory of Episcopacv in Connecticut says of this service: "This was 
undoubtedly the first instance in that town of the dedication of a 
child to God 'by our office and ministry,' and the first occasion on 
which the forms of the liturgy were used by a clergyman of the 
Church of England." 

All organized work of the Church of England in this country at 
that time was under the charge of an English Missionary society 
founded in 1701 and styled the Society for the Propagation of the 
Gospel in Foreign Parts. In later years the society was styled Ven- 
erable, and became so well known that for ordinary purposes the 
initials " Ven. S. P. G." were a sufficient description. This society 
continued to have charge of all church work here up to the time of 
the Revolution. It appointed the clergy, paid their stipends and 
received their reports. In 1737 it appointed the Rev. Jonathan 
Arnold (who had succeeded Mr. Johnson in the Congregational 
church in West Haven, but had later embraced Episcopacy) a mis- 
sionary for West Haven, Derby and Waterbury. At this time a few 
families (some accounts say two or three, others six or seven) living 
at this place, desired the ministrations of the Church. Mr. Arnold 
did not reside here and his ministry was very brief. He is said to 
have baptized two children here. He was a native of Haddam and a 
graduate of Yale College (1723.) He seems to have been a man of 
erratic disposition and not adapted to a successful ministry. For 
two or three years after this, occasional services were held here by 
Mr. Johnson, then of Stratford, and Mr. Beach of Newtown. The 
Rev. Theophilus Morris was the next missionary in charge. He 
fixed his residence at Derby. He was an Englishman. One of his 
contemporaries, the Rev. Mr. Johnson, wrote of him: 

He is in many respects a gentleman of good accomplishments, but it does not 
seem likely that he will suit or be suited with the disposition of these country 

♦Presumably Abel, born August 12, 1734. 



650 HISTORY OF WATERS Unr. 

people, so that I very much doubt whether he will be happy in them or thej^ in him,, 
and I wish that he was better provided for and that some young man previously 
acquainted with this country or that could suit his disposition to it, were provided 
for them. 

One reads between these lines pretty clearly what IVIr. IMorris's 
limitations were. He seems to have been a well ineaning man with 
considerable energy, but his zeal was not according to knowledge; 
he involved himself in difficulties with his brethren here and he 
soon after returned to England apparently to his own and their 
relief. 

Mr. Morris's successor was the Rev. James Lyons, an Irishman 
by birth, of whom the historian of the church says that ''if he had 
genius and zeal, he was another example of a tiller in the field that 
needed a special missionary to watch him and keep him from run- 
ning his plough upon the rocks." Mr. Lyons was here about four 
years. He resided in Derby and preached one-third of the time in 
Waterbury. During these years, notwithstanding some defects in 
the missionaries in charge, the church had greatly increased. In the 
year 1740 the famous Whitefield preached throughout New England, 
and his preaching was followed by a condition of intense religious 
excitement. The result of this was to turn the attention of the staid 
and moderate portion of the community to the more quiet and con- 
servative methods of the Episcopal chitrch, and there followed a 
great accession to the Episcopal ranks. Dr. Bronson says: "The 
prosperity of the Episcopal church in Waterbury dates from about 
1740." It is said that twenty-five heads of families at one time 
transferred their membership from the Congregational to the Epis- 
copal society. 

Mr. Lyons's successor was the Rev. Richard Mansfield. He was 
the son of Deacon Jonathan Mansfield of New Haven, and was 
born there, October i, 1723, and graduated at Yale college in 1741. 
For five years he was rector of the Hopkins Grammar school, and 
as during this time he connected himself with the Episcopal church 
(the Hopkins Grammar school being distinctly a Congregational 
institution) and still continued for some years to hold the position, 
it is evident that even at that early age he must have possessed a 
rare combination of firmness, gentleness and attractive traits of 
character. In 1748 he was ordained in England and appointed a 
missionary, on a salary of £20 a year, to the villages of Derby, West 
Haven, Waterbury and Northbury, and established himself at 
Derby, that being a convenient point for the care of this extensive 
charge. On October 10, 1751, he married Anne, daughter of Cap- 
tain Joseph Hull of Derby. She had reached at that time the 



THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO 1830. 651 

mature age of fifteen years and four months.* Her elder sister 
had, the preceding summer, married the Rev. Mark Leavenworth, 
the Congregational minister of Waterbury. For ten years Mr. 
Mansfield administered the affairs of this large district with 
faithfulness and success. After Mr. vScovil took charge of the 
parishes in the neighborhood Mr. Mansfield restricted his labors 
to Derby and vicinit}', and there he lived, universally beloved 
and respected, until April 2, 1820, when he died in the ninety- 
seventh year of his age and the seventy-second of his ministry; 
one of the longest, if not absolutely the longest, of pastorates 
on record. His Alma Mater in 1792 conferred upon him the 
degree of D. D., he being the first Episcopal clergyman to whom 
she extended that honor. He was one of the persons proposed to 
succeed Bishop vSeabury, but declined to be a candidate. In his 
ninety-sixth 3^ear he presided over the convention which elected 
Bishop Brownell. 

As early as 1742 measures were taken to provide a place of wor- 
ship, and application was made to the town for a lot for a site. 
After some negotiation, in April, 1743, the town gave them, instead 
of a site, ^12 in money to pay for such a one as they might pro- 
cure. The site had already been selected and preparations for the 
building made. Although the sum of ^12 was named in the deed 
as consideration (perhaps to make the acceptance of the town's 
gift legal), the lot was really presented to them by John Judd and 
is described as taken from his house lot. It was on the corner of 
West Main and Willow streets, the lot now owned by Charles M. 
Mitchell— and is described as forty-five feet on the south side, 
twenty-eight feet on the west, fifty feet on the north and thirty- 
nine feet on the east. The church and parish bore the name of St. 
James. In those days church buildings were not warmed, but it 
was customary to have a small building in the neighborhood, with 
fire-places, where those who came from a distance could spend the 
hour between services and be warm and comfortable while they ate 
their luncheon, and could fill their foot stoves for the afternoon 
service. These buildings were called Sabbath-day houses — or, in 
the language of the time, " Sabbady houses." A building of this 
sort containing several rooms stood on South Willow street near 
where is now the residence of Mrs. William Brown, f 



* Early marriages were more common then ihan now, and there may have been other extenuating circum- 
stances. I do not know what they were. Perhaps she was very pretty. 

tin 1744 thirty-nine members of the church, having first obtained in public meeting the town's consent,^ 
applied to the legislature for "parish privileges "—one of which was the right to lay a tax, but the petition 
was rejected. 



652 HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 

This was an era of prosperity for the parish. It received several 
valuable gifts of land from members and a rector}^ was built by 
subscription. This was on land given by Oliver Welton and must 
have been not far from where F. L. Curtiss's house now stands. 
It was the third lot from Willow street. Oliver inherited it from 
his grandfather John. He gave it, while yet a minor, with consent 
of his guardian, the Rev. John Southmayd, and confirmed the deed 
after he attained his majority. 

In 1759 Mr. Mansfield gave up the northward end of his large 
mission field and was succeeded by the Rev. James vScovil, who 
took charge of Waterbury, Northbury, New Cambridge (now Bris- 
tol), and later of Westbury. He fixed his residence at Water- 
bury, thus becoming the first resident rector. He was son of 
Lieutenant William Scovil and grandson of vSergeant John Scovil, 
who was one of the original settlers of the town. He was 
born January 27, 1732-3, and probably in the house on Willow 
street long known as the "old Johnson House," which was taken 
down, after being partially destroyed by fire, in 1889, being at 
that time by far the oldest house in town. This house was 
built by Sergeant John Scovil for his son William, and left to 
hiin by will in 1725. About the time of James's birth, William 
Scovil exchanged places with Abram Utter and removed to that 
part of Westbury known as Nova vScotia hill. The dates on the 
record indicate that this removal took place subsequent to the 
date of James's birth, but there was a tradition in the family 
that he was born at Nova Scotia hill. When James wScovil was 
about ten years old, his mother having died, his father married 
Elizabeth, daughter of James Brown, before mentioned as the 
first Episcopalian in Waterbury. Whether she brought Episco- 
pacy into the family I cannot say, but it came about that time, 
as William Scovil's name appears as a member of the Congrega- 
tional society not long before. When young Scovil was about 
twenty years of age, an injury which rendered him lame for a 
time and placed him under the care of Dr. Porter made him 
turn his attention to study. He was placed under the care of 
the Rev. Mr. Southmayd, who found him so apt a scholar that 
he urged his parents to give him a college education. This 
being approved, he at once began his classical studies. He re- 
mained with Mr. vSouthmayd until cured of his lameness, and 
completed his preparation for college at home, probably under 
the care of the Rev. Mr. Trumbull. He graduated at Yale in 
1757. A year afterward the vestry of vSt. James's parish voted 
to contribute to the expenses of his journey to England for 



THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO 1S30. 653 

ordination,* to give him ^'20, sterling, a year, provided he got 
nothing at ///////, and half of whatever he might get at /mm, and 
the use of the glebe. Hu/n then meant England, although few 
of those vestrymen, perhaps none, had ever seen it. On April i, 
1759, he was ordained in Westminster abbey by the bishop of 
Rochester, and returned as a recognized missionary under the 
auspices of the " Ven. vS. P. G." He was presented by the society, 
at his ordination, with a folio Bible and Prayer-book, bound in one 
volume, for use in the church, f 

Mr. Scovil continued in his mission, ministering with success to 
his several charges, until the disturbances of the Revolution cut off 
the assistance of the society in England. Then followed a period 
of great hardship for Episcopal congregations. They naturally 
sympathized with the mother country and thus drew upon them- 
selves, and especially upon the clergy, much suspicion and fre- 
quently open hostility. Mr. Scovil, though much respected by his 
neighbors, did not escape his share. On one occasion, when return- 
ing with his cows from a pasture on the west side of the river, just 
at night-fall, he discovered a man loading a musket in the borders 
of a wood, whose conduct awakened his suspicion. He immediately 
hastened to him and asked him pleasantly if he saw any game. 
The man replied, rather angrily, " I should have shot you if you 
had not spoken to me, for I knew you were a tory." He then 
advised him to leave his cows and take the shortest course home, 
or he might fall a victim to others who were greatly incensed at 

* The following document has recently been found among the papers of St. Peter's, Plymouth, by the 
Rev. Dr. Gammack : 

" Northbury in Waterbury, July y' 27, A. D. 1758. We the Subscribers due promise to pay each one 
the sume that we subscribe in this paper unto Lieut. Jacob Blakslee and David Blakslee by the first day of 
October next ensuing the date hereof : and we the subscribers do by these presents acknowledge ourselves to 
be firmly bound to the said Blakeslees to pay to them the sums that we subscribe by the ist of October afore- 
said, and the money is to be delivered by the said Blakslees to Mr. Scovil in order to help him to go home to 
England for Ordmation for Waterbury, Northbury and Cambridge for to be our minister. 

£ s. d.qr. £ s. d.qr. 

Caleb Thompson, o 11 0.0 May Way, 06 

Isaac Castel, o 16 11. 

Asahel Castel, . .' . . .08 
Stephen Blakeslee, .... 07 

Obediah Scott, 05 

Ebenezer Ford, .... 15 

Moses Blakslee, o 10 

Ebenezer AUin, . . . . 015 

There is also a memorandum of payments showing that Abel Curtis, whose name does not appear as a sub- 
scriber, paid I shilling ; also the following : " Over paid by me, Jacob Blakeslee, to Mr. Scovill, 4.18.5." 

+ After doing duty here for many years, it was by a vote of the society presented to the Episcopal inhab- 
itants of the towns of Columbia and Waterbury in Ohio. Some years since, Isaac Bronson of Medina, 
O., a son of Dr. Tillotson Bronson, finding that the book was no longer used, made arrangements to have it 
brought back to this place, where it now remains in good condition, in possession of a descendant of Mr. 
Scovil. It has the seal of the " Ven. S. P. G." and bears the imprint of 1737. 



David Way, 06 

3 David Blakeslee .21 

3 Jacob Blakslee, .... 16 

I Mary Ford, o g 

I Enos Ford, 00 

o Ruben Blakslee, . . . . .08 



654 HTSTORT OF WATERS URY. 

him and might not be appeased by being spoken to. Mr. Scovil 
thought it best to take this advice, and leaving his cows crossed the 
fields, waded the river and hastened to his home. Party spirit 
seems, however, to have run very high just then. He did not feel 
safe in his own house, and leaving it at night he secreted himself 
in a barn which belonged to him on Long hill, where he remained 
hidden for some time, various members of the family supplying 
him with food. One of his sons, returning on one occasion from 
this place of concealment, was met by two soldiers, who took his 
horse from him and compelled him to walk as a prisoner to Strat- 
ford (about thirty miles), where he was detained some time in con- 
finement. He had been guilty of no overt act, and naturally 
resented this treatment.* 

At the close of the war the English society and the British gov- 
ernment offered liberal inducements to loyalists who should remove 
to the British colonies. It seemed impossible, in the disturbed 
condition of things, for the parishes here to give Mr. Scovil an 
adequate support, although they offered to do all that thev could. 
In 1788, after having visited New Brunswick and officiated there 
for several summers (returning to spend the winters with his people 
here), he removed there with his family, five years after the close of 
the war — thus terminating a connection of almost thirty years with 
the parish. He became rector of Kingston in New Brunswick, 
where he died December 19, 1808, in the fiftieth year of his ministry. 
He was succeeded by a son and by a grandson in the same parish. 
His wife, who was a daughter of Captain George Nichols, a promi- 
nent citizen of this town, died in 1835, aged ninety-three. All his 
family went with him except his eldest son James, who had mar- 
ried and settled here, and who continued to occupy his father's 
residence, near the corner of North and East Main streets, front- 
ing the public green. The barn where the Rev. Mr. Scovil was 
hidden, which stood on almost the highest point of Long hill, was 
accidentally destroyed by fire only a few years since. Dr. Bronson, 
in his History (page 302), quoting in part some other authority, says 
of him: 

Mr. Scovil was known for punctuality and faithfulness in the discharge of his 
duties. He taught his people from house to house, comforted the aged, instructed 
the young and made himself agreeable to children. ... He had a grave and 
becoming deportment and was sound in doctrine. 



* The Rev. Dr. Clark, in a memorandum in regard to Mr. Scovil, says : " I met this son in New Brunswick 
in 1844. He was then near eighty years of age, having resided there about sixty years, and every wound 
■seemed as fresh and sensitive as when first inflicted, upon what he termed ' the rebel soil of the States.' 
He averred that no temptation that earth could present would ever induce him to set his foot on soil where 
he had received such unprovoked and cruel wrongs." 



THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO miO. 



655 



The withdrawal of the "Venerable Society's" support, and the 
disturbed state of the country, left the Episcopal church here, as 
elsewhere, in an impoverished condition, and for some years it had 
a hard struggle to maintain its services.* During this time the Rev. 
Solomon Blakeslee, the Rev. Chauncey Prindle and the Rev. David 
Foot each officiated for a short time. They gave a portion of their 
services to this parish and the remainder to Salem, Bristol, North- 
bury and Woodbury. Plans were also discussed for uniting several 
of these parishes in one, but they were not carried out. 

Mr. Blakeslee was a graduate of Yale college, in the class of 
1785, was ordained deacon at St. Paul's church, Norwalk, June 3, 
1789, and priest at Middletown by Bishop vSeabury in 1793. As his 
service here was in 1789 it must have been immediately after his 
ordination as deacon. He afterward succeeded Bishop vSeabury in 
St. James's parish. New London, and served at several places in the 
eastern part of the state. He died in 1835. The Rev. Chauncey 
Prindle was a nephew of the Rev. James Scovil and a native of 
Westbury. He was for some years rector of that parish and after- 
ward rector at Plymouth, Salem and Oxford. He was buried in 
the old cemetery at Gunntown. He was born July 13, 1753, gradu- 
ated at Yale in 1776, and died August 25, 1833, after a ministry of 
fifty years. He was a man of considerable ability, of excellent 
character, and an indefatigable worker in his profession. It is 
related of him that he swam his horse through a high and danger- 
ous flood in the Naugatuck river rather than fail in an appointment 
for a service. David Foot was born in Marlborough, October 5, 
1760, graduated at Dartmouth college in 1778, was ordained deacon 
at New London by Bishop Seabury, June 11, 1788, and was then 
appointed to serve in Hebron and Chatham. In October of the 
same year he was ordained priest at North Haven. After leaving 
here, he became rector at Rye, N. Y., where he died August i, 1793. 

On November 13, 1784, Dr. Samuel Seabury, having been selected 
for the office by the clergy of this diocese in March of the previous 
year at a meeting held in Woodbury, was consecrated Bishop of 
Connecticut at Aberdeen, vScotland, becoming thus the first bishop 
of the American church. He reached this country in 1785, and in 
May, 1786, a committee from the parish waited on him at Stratford 
and desired him to visit Waterbury. He could not do so at that 
time, but on October i, following, it is recorded that he confirmed 
here 256 persons. That must have been equal to about one-tenth of 
the population, and the occasion was one of profound rejoicing 

* During the forty years in which it was under the care of the Englisli society, it had received over 
$6000 in money, besides liberal gifts of books. 



656 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

among- "churchmen." This, too, was in the darkest days of the 
church here, before Mr. Scovil had finally left, but when he was 
preparing to go, and when they were as sheep without a shepherd. 

In October, 1791, the Rev. vSeth Hart, who had been officiating 
for some time previous as lay reader, was ordained deacon bv 
Bishop Seabury at Watertown, with the agreement that he was to 
officiate here half the time, the other half to be divided between 
vSalem and Woodbury. His salary was ^40, lawful money, the first 
year, to be increased ^i annually until it reached ;^45, and the use 
of the glebe. I suppose this was equal to about $150, biit it was in 
" ready money," which went a great way in those days, and the use 
of the glebe was doubtless of considerable value. Mr. Hart's min- 
istry here is said to have been quite successful, but he only 
remained about two years after his ordination, and then removed 
to Wallingford. He officiated also at North Haven, and four years 
later he removed to Hempstead, Long Island, where he remained 
rector until his death, March 16, 1832. He was born in Berlin 
(Conn.), June 21, 1763, graduated at Yale college in 1784, was 
ordained deacon October 9, 1791, and priest at Huntington, October 
14, 1792. It is recorded of him that he was a good scholar, an 
amiable man, a successful teacher and an acceptable preacher. 
While here he owned and occupied the place next south of St. 
John's church (E. M. Burrall's), including the ground where the 
church now stands and several acres of adjoining land. When he 
left, several liberal persons bought his place and presented it to the 
church, the old rectory before mentioned having become unfit for 
use. It was afterwards sold, and the present site was repurchased 
about 1847. 

The affairs of the parish and its people were now clearly pros- 
pering. The old St. James's church, at the corner of Willow street, 
had been occupied nearly fifty years, and both the needs and the 
pride of the parish demanded a better house. In April, 1793, dur- 
ing the Rev. Mr. Hart's ministry, a committee w^as appointed "to 
agree upon a place to set a church and the bigness of the same," 
and in September following, having voted that the society were 
willing and thought it necessary to build a church, Eli Curtis, Esq., 
Jude Blakeslee and Captain Amos Bronson were chosen a com- 
mittee "to set a stake for the place where to build a church."* 

* These gentlemen were all non-residents. Eli Curtis was a lawyer residing in Watertown, and I think 
Mr. Blakeslee and Captain Bronson were both from Plymouth. Difficulties and heart-burnings so frequently 
arose in those days from differences of opinion as to the proper location of churches and schools that it was 
quite customary to call in a committee of disinterested persons from neighboring towns to "set a stake." 
Whether this parish in its wisdom avoided all trouble by appointing the committee at the outset, or whether 
some difficulties had already arisen, I do not know. That there were difficulties, however, very clearlv appears. 



THE EPISCOPAL PAPISII TO 1S30. 



657 



Whether this committee acted or not, the record does not show, 
but in December following- another committee, namely, John Woos- 
ter of Derby, 
Thomas At- 
water of 
Cheshire and 
Abner Brad- 
ley of Wood- 
bury, were 
appointed, 
and this time 
under the 
sanction of 
the county 
court, which 
had jurisdic- 
tion when ap- 
pl i ed to in 
such matters. 
Still they 
were not quite 
satisfied, and 
in the follow- 
ing March the 
court and 
committee 
were asked 
to place the 
stake five rods 
further south, 
so that the 
first stake 
must have 
been driven 
very near 
where the 
S o 1 d i e r s ' 
monument is. 
O n February 
9, 1795. a vote 
was passed 

directing the committee to build a decent, well-furnished church 
fifty-four by thirty-eight feet, with a decent steeple on the outside, 
at the east end of the same. 
42 




658 



HISIVRY OF WATERS URT. 



This church building was a great credit to the parish. Its gallery 
windows were arched at the top — a feature which was supposed to 
give it a churchly appearance — and it had a tall, slender, gracefully 
tapering spire, on the top of which shone a bright gilt star, with 
a handsome gilt vane just beneath. David Hoadley was the archi- 
tect. The interior was divided into square pews with seats on 
three sides ; the ceiling was arched between the galleries ; the 
pulpit was high, with winding stairs on each side and the reading 
desk in front of it below. They were of dark wood, probably 
cherry. The robing-room was near the entrance of the church. 
After reading the service, the minister walked the length of the 
church to the robing-room, laid aside his surplice, returned and 
slowly mounted the long pulpit stairs in his black gown. If done 
with dignity this was quite an effective part of the service. The 
crowning glory of the church consisted of two large fresco paint- 
ings, one at either end of the arched ceiling of the church on the 
pediment over the pulpit and over the choir gallery. As I remem- 
ber them, they occupied the whole of the pediments, or ends of the 
arch. They were painted in different shades of green on a white 
ground. The subject of that over the pulpit was the baptism of 
Jesus by John in the river Jordan. The Jordan was a very respect- 
able stream, looking nearly a qtiarter of a mile wide in the picture, 
and the landscape on the further side was quite inviting. I always 
thought, while looking at it, of the hymn : 

On Jordan's stormy banks I stand, 

And cast a wistful eye 
To Canaan's fair and happy land, 

Where my possessions lie. 

The river seemed altogether too deep to wade. The picture at the 
other end was a village green on which was a church — the church, 
I suppose, in which the picture was — with rather stiff trees and a 
long row of people moving toward the sanctuary, conspicuous 
among whom was the rector, marked by his shovel hat. To my 
boyish eyes these pictures were marvels of art. At the same time 
that this church was being built, the Congregational society was 
erecting one at the other end of the Green, and a healthy spirit of 
emulation was doubtless of considerable advantage to both build- 
ings. The new church was consecrated b}^ the name of St. John's 
on November i, 1797, by Bishop Jarvis. 

After Mr. Hart's departure the pulpit was partially supplied for 
a time by the Rev. Alexander V. Griswold and by the Rev. William 
Green. Of Mr. Griswold nothing more need be said here than that 
he subsequently became Bishop of Massachusetts. The Rev. 



THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO 1830. 659 

William Green was a graduate of Dartmouth college in 1791. He 
was ordained deacon by Bishop Seabury at New London, October 
18, 1793. To the record of the ordination the bishop adds: "Mr. 
Green was ordained on my own personal knowledge of him and on 
recommendation of Rev. Dr. Bela Hubbard of New Haven; he was 
licensed to preach and purposes to go into Maryland." The Dart- 
mouth college catalogue says that he died in i8or, aged thirty. 
Where he spent the few years that intervened betwen his service 
here and his death I have not learned. 

Soon after the completion of the church, in December, 1797, 
the Rev. Tillotson Bronson, who had officiated here and in Bristol 
for some months, became the rector, with the agreement that he 
was to officiate here three-fourths of the time and one-fourth in 
Salem society. His salary was $250. In Jime, 1806, not feeling 
able longer to support his family on this sum, and the parish being 
unable (or unwilling) to increase it, he preached his farewell ser- 
mon, and retired, with the approbation of the bishop and the good 
will of the people. Dr. Tillotson Bronson (D. D., Brown univer- 
sity, 1 8 13), was a son of Captain Amos Bronson of Plymouth, whose 
residence was at Jericho on the Naugatuck river. He was born 
there January 8, 1762, fitted for college with the Rev. John Trum- 
bull, Congregational pastor of Watertown, graduated at Yale in 
1786, studied theology with Dr. Mansfield and Bishop Seabury, was 
ordained deacon September 11, 1787, and priest February 24, 1788. 
He preached for a year in Vermont and New Hampshire, which 
was the missionary ground of that period; then for a while in 
Boston and at several places in this state, and also taught school. 
While in Waterbury he lived in a house on Grand street which was 
taken down in 1882 to make room for the Baptist church. He 
owned the place and sold it to his successor, the Rev. V. H. Barber. 
From Waterbury he went to New Haven to take charge of the 
ChurchiU'jji s Magazine, a periodical then recently established, which 
he continued to edit with ability for some years. Only a few 
months, however, after leaving Waterbury he was appointed by the 
Convention principal of the Episcopal academy at Cheshire. He 
removed there, and after a long and successful career as the head 
of that institution he died September 6, 1826. He was a prominent 
man in the church and plenty of material exists for a fuller biogra- 
phy, but most of it relates to his life after leaving here. 

I notice on the record (as a sign of progress) that on August 19, 
1799, a committee was appointed to procure subscriptions to pur- 
chase a bass viol. On December 8, 1803, it was "voted to dignify 
the pews." This consisted in allotting the seats in the church to 



(56o HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

the members of the congregation according to their " dignity," the 
standard being a fixed one, based partly upon age, partly on the 
amount of tax paid and partly on official or social standing. 

Dr. Bronson was succeeded by the Rev. Virgil Horace Barber, 
who remained here from June i6, 1807, until May 6, 1814. He was 
a son of the Rev. Daniel Barber of Claremont, N. H. He was 
ordained deacon June 9, 1805, and priest, September 20, 1807. I have 
not been able to learn where he was educated, but he was a schol- 
arly man and a superior teacher, and while here maintained a 
school of high order. He doubtless discharged his ministerial 
duties with zeal, but it was as an inspiring and instructive teacher 
he did most for the generation to which he belonged, and his influ- 
ence was long felt. It is said that he required his own family, 
including the pupils who resided with him, to converse in Latin. 
He was, however, eccentric and somewhat unpractical. I find this 
entry on the parish records when he had been here but six months: 
"December 29, 1807. Voted to send Mr. Justus Warner to the 
town of Claremont, N. H., to know the reason of Mr. Barber's not 
returning to this town, and to give Mr. Warner $14 for his 
expenses." There were no telegraphs, and letters had evidently 
failed. We know that Mr. Barber came back, but why not sooner 
remains a mystery. He left here to become principal of an acad- 
emy at Fairfield, N. Y., but two years later (in 1816) became a 
Roman Catholic, and, placing his wife and children in a convent, 
went, in July, 1817, to Rome, and after a period of study, became a 
priest in the Society of Jesuits. A clergyman who had known him 
here visited him in Rome, and found him an inmate of a Jesuit 
college under the name of Signor Barberini, clothed in the habit, 
and practicing the austerities which belong to the order. After his 
return from Rome he went in 1822, by direction of his superior, to 
Claremont, where he established a Roman Catholic church. Later 
he was sent on a mission to the Indian tribes in Maine and to 
various towns in that state where there were Roman Catholic resi- 
dents without pastors. He was afterward assigned to duty in 
Maryland and that vicinity. He died at Georgetown, D. C, March 
27, 1847-* 

* The Rev. Daniel Barber, the father of Virgil H. Barber, was a native of Sirasbury, and was born 
October 2, 1756. In 1827, when he was seventy-one years old, he published, at Washington, D. C, a pam- 
phlet entitled " History of My Own Times," which is of considerable value as a picture of the period. He 
was a soldier in the Revolution, and kept a diary, portions of which are contained in his pamphlet and are 
also copied in the sketch of Simsbury in Barber's Historical Collections of Connecticut. The Barbers seem 
to have been an independent family, much given to speculative theology (the main source of recreation for 
thinking people in those times), and always having the courage of their convictions, if not a little to spare. 
Daniel's father and mother each had their own views and stood by them. "They could never agree," says 
Daniel, "as to their points of faith." When Daniel was twenty-seven years old he became an Episcopalian, 
at thirty an Episcopal clergyman and at sixty-two a Roman Catholic. This was in 1818, when he publicly 



THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO 1S30. 66 1 

In September, 1814, the Rev. Alpheus Geer was invited to 
become rector, at a salary of $600, " provided Gunntown will pay 
one-third for his services one-third of the time." The vote as 
finally passed was to pay him $400 for two-thirds of his time, leav- 
ing Mr. Geer and Gunntown to settle for the remainder. Alpheus 
Geer was born at Kent, August 7, 1788, graduated at Union college 
in 1813, was ordained deacon by Bishop Hobart in New York city, 
June 12, 1 8 14, and priest by Bishop Griswold at Middletown, early 
in 1815. He remained in Waterbury nearly sixteen years, from the 
fall of 1814 to the spring of 1830. He went from here to Hebron, 
where he remained about fourteen years, and afterwards preached 
at a number of places in this state. He died at Norwich, February 
3, 1866. While here he lived first on vSouth Main street and later in 
the Judge Hopkins place, on West Main street. The period of Mr. 
Geer's pastorate was one of quiet and moderate prosperity. There 
was not at that time much growth in the town, and as a semi-farmer 
clergyman, who was expected to live to some extent off the product 
of his glebe, he was a very fair representative of the country clergy 
of his time. On Sunday, October 20, 1816, he presented to Bishop 
Hobart of New York, then acting as bishop in this diocese, which 
was temporarily without a bishop, a class of 226 for confirmation, 
being the largest class ever confirmed by Bishop Hobart. The 
manuscript from which the information in this sketch was in part 
obtained, adds: "It is thought the largest ever presented to any 
bishop in this country." The writer was not aware of the class of 
256 confirmed in the same place by Bishop Seabury thirty years 
before, but these two classes, both of them in this parish, have 
seldom been exceeded in numbers. Mr. Geer's second son, the Rev. 
George Jarvis Geer (D. D., Trinity, 1842) was for many years a suc- 
cessful clergyman in the city of New York, and his grandson, the 
Rev. William Montague Geer, is now one of the assistant ministers 
of Trinity parish in that city. 



announced his change and left his church in Clareniont. There seems to be some discrepancy in tlie several 
biographical statements as to whether the father or son first entered the Roman Catholic church. The prob- 
ability is that the father started first, but the son outstripped him in the race. It is a sad story throughout, — 
such a spirit of self-sacrifice and such a lack of sense. When Virgil H. Barber made up his mind to become 
a Roman Catholic priest he was thirty-four years old and his wife twenty-eight, and they had five children, 
and no means of support. The mother and children were placed in a convent, and the father went to Rome 
to study. All became prominent in the church of their choice. Mrs. Barber was known " in religion " as 
Sister Mary Augustine (or as it is frequently written, Austin). She died at Georgetown, D. C, January i, 
i860. Their son, Samuel Joseph, became a priest of the order of Jesuits, and died in Charles county, Md., 
I February 23, 1864. The youngest and last surviving member of the family, Sister Mary Josephine, died at 
the Convent of the Visitation in St. Louis, two or three years since. 

Besides the " History of My Own Times." Daniel Barber wrote " Catholic Worship and Piety explained 
and recommended to a very near Friend and Others," — a pamphlet, Washington, 1821. See also, "Catholic 
Memoirs of Vermont and New Hampshire," by Bishop Goesbriand, Burlington, Vt., 18S6, and Griffin s Jour- 
nal, Philadelphia, June i, 1894. 



662 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



ST. PETER'vS PARIvSH, NORTHBURY. 

In Northbury, at "the Hollow," now Thomaston, a building was 
erected about 1738 (on land given by the Rev. John Southmayd, 
pastor of the First church), which was used as a place of public 
meetings, for religious purposes, and also for a school-house. After 
a few years a portion of the society wished to build a new church 
and preferred to have it on the hill. This led to a division. Part 
of the society built a new house and went to the hill, while the 
others remained at the old place. Dr. Leonard Bacon of New 
Haven used to say that " anger and marriage were converting ordi- 
nances." This view of the matter was illustrated in Northbury, for 
it was not long before this remnant left in "the Hollow" became 
an Episcopal parish, or at any rate a band of people worshipping 
according to the liturgy of the Church of England and receiving 
the occasional ministrations of the missionaries of the Venerable 
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, Messrs. Morris, Arnold, 
Lyon and Mansfield. 

Dr. Bronson's History (page 310) represents the majority of the 
congregation as having become Episcopalians and having voted 
out the minority with the Rev. Samuel Todd, the Congregational 
clergyman, and Dr. Beard sley has followed this in his History of 
the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. But the Rev. E. B. Hillard, 
in some researches made in 1888, while he was pastor of the Con- 
gregational church at Plymouth, found a document which puts a 
somewhat different face on the matter. As this document does not 
appear in the Colonial Records, and is valuable evidence on a con- 
troverted, or at least misunderstood, matter, it is reproduced here, 
pour servir. It is dated at Northbury, October 8, 1740: 

To the Honorable and General Assembly convened at New Haven: 
We, the siibscribers, having in time past applied ourselves to this Assembly for, 
and they being so complaisant to us ward as to grant us, the liberty in the first 
place to hire the gospel lareached with us in the winter season, which privilege we 
thankfully improved, and after that, through their benignity toward us we obtained 
the privilege of hiring the gospel preached with us for the space of two years, and 
having no house in the centre of us convenient to attend the public worship in, the 
Rev. Mr. Southmayd encouraged us to erect a small house for that use, by giving 
us a parcel of land in the centre of us for that end, upon which we built a small 
house and in a short time carried on the public worship peaceably in it. And after 
we had met in the house about a year our necessity was so great of enjoying the 
gospel ordinances, upon our request (though we were very small) the Assembly was 
l^leased to favor us with society privileges, upon which in a little time we gave Mr. 
Samuel Todd a call to settle in the work of the ministry with us, of which he 
accepted, and, being settled with us, we find our obligations to him full as much, 



THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO 1830. 66t, 

if not more than we can answer; and it being evident at this day to the Assembly 
that a certain number among us are striving to involve us in much greater charges 
still, which, if obtained, we despair of answering our obligation to Mr. Todd, and 
we humbly conceive that the forementioned house of which we are the proprietors 
will answer the present necessity of the society to a,ttend public worship and which 
we freely dedicate to that use, and request, if the Assembly see fit, that the said 
house may be established the place of public worship so long as they see fit. That 
so the charge of building a meeting-house or any charge for that end may be pre- 
vented at present.* 

At the October session the assembly apparent!}' took no action, but 
the following- May, " being informed of the broken and confused 
circumstances of the parish at Northbury, etc., they appointed a 
committee to conduct said society in the choice of proper officers 
and advise and direct where they shall meet on the Sabbath for 
public worship." In October following they appointed another 
committee, in part the same persons, to " fix a site," etc. f The end 
of it all was that the party favoring a new church and a new site 
carried the day, but the disaffected portion declined to be taxed and 
stuck to their school-house, and soon after most of them declared 
themselves members of the Church of England. 

In 1759, when the Rev. James vScovil became the rector in Water- 
bury, he gave one-half his services to Northbury and New Cam- 
bridge. In 177 1, Northbury and New Cambridge seem to have set 
up for themselves. Dr. Bronson says they obtained the services of 
a minister. In 1773 the Rev. James Nichols, a native of Waterbury, 
became the rector, supplying the two places; but in 1775 he went 
to Litchfield. During the Revolution few services appear to have 
been held, although there were many ardent churchmen in that 
section of the town, the feeling being so strong that there was a 
great number of disaffected persons, some of whom suffered seri- 
ously for their opinions. Among thein was Moses Dunbar, who was 
hanged for treason at Hartford (see Volume I, page 434). 

In 1784 an Episcopal society was legally formed under the new 
enabling act, and for the next few years the parish had such ser- 
vices as they could secure temporarily. The Rev. Asahel Baldwin, 
the Rev. Philo Shelton, the Rev. Tillotson Bronson and the Rev. 
Edward Blakeslee appear on the record as having officiated. In 
1788 the Rev. Chauncey Prindle became rector, serving both North- 
bury and Westbury, and so remained imtil 1806. In 1795 Plymouth 
was incorporated as a separate town. 

* The signers to this document are: William Ludenton, Jonathan Cook, John Sutlef, Jr., Barnabas 
Ford, John How, Isaac Cassel, Thomas Blasle [Blakeslee], Jacob Blasle, Ebenezer Richardson, Caleb 
Humaston, Phinehas Rice, Daniel Curtis, Gedian Allen, Jeremiah Peck, Jeremiah Peck, Jr., Ebenezer 
Elwell, Samuel Frost, John Sutlef, Samuel Jacobs. 

+ Colonial Records, Vol. VIII, pp. 373, 424. 



664 HISTORY OF WATERBUHY. 



CHRIST'S CHURCH, WATERTOWN. 

In 1764 twenty persons (whose names are given in Bronson's 
History, page 308) entered into an agreement "to hold public wor- 
ship in Westbury on those Sundays when there was no preaching 
in Waterbury," and to make arrangements to build an Episcopal 
church. They met at the house of James Doolittle in the winter and 
at Ensign David Scott's in the summer. The next year (1765) 
Captain George Nichols of Waterbury gave them a lot, and by 
October, through the efficient management of Captain Edward 
Scovil, they had a building fit to occupy, although not completed. 
It stood, as nearly as can be ascertained, on the east side of the road 
leading to Waterbury, about a quarter of a mile southward from the 
green and a little southwest from the Congregational church, which 
stood within the old cemetery enclosure, or nearly so, at the 
southwest corner. The Episcopal church is supposed to have been 
on the south side of the road leading east. 

In 1773 the Rev. James wScovil of Waterbury agreed to give one- 
third of his time to this parish, and it continued under his care so 
long as he remained in Waterbiiry. This was nominally until 1786, 
although during the last two years he was absent much of the time 
in New Brunswick. In 1788 the Rev. Chauncey Prindle, a native of 
Westbury, a nephew of Mr. Scovil and a Yale graduate of 1776, then 
in deacon's orders and previously a lay-reader, took charge of the 
parish, having also the church at Northbury under his care. In 
1793 a new church was built, and consecrated by Bishop Seabury as 
Christ's church on November 18, 1794. This church stood on a 
piece of ground purchased of Samuel vSouthmayd, at the intersection 
of the streets near the site of the present church.* 



ST. MICHAEL'S, NAUGATUCK. f 

This parish was formally organized February 16, 1786, at the 
house of Jobamah Gunn, and fourteen persons enrolled themselves 
as members. They mostly resided in the western part of Salem 
society, which was then known as Gunntown, the Gunns being a 
prominent family there. Services were conducted at some private 



* A part of the open ground about the church has since been inclosed in the grounds now occupied by J. 
A. Buckingham. The house itself fronted the east, the west line being nearly in a line with Mr. Bucking- 
ham's east fence. In 1780 Watertown became a separate town. 

t This following sketch has been mostly taken from a manuscript history of the parish prepared by the 
Rev. E. C. Gardner, for the use of which I am indebted to the kindness of the present rector, the Rev. J. W. 
Ellsworth— F. [. K. 



THE EPISCOPAL PARISH TO 1830. 665 

house, usually by the minister officiating in Waterbury, one Sunday 
in a month, sometimes every third Sunday; the services of the 
intervening- Sunday being conducted by a lay-reader. In 1803, 
after several unsuccessful efforts, a small church building (the vote 
says 44 by 34 feet) was sufficiently finished for use. This stood, 
according to the record, "on the hill, about fifty rods west of 
Jobamah Gunn's dwelling house," which still retains the local 
name, Church hill. In 1806 the Rev. Chauncey Prindle, who was 
then settled in Watertown, was engaged to preach in the parish one- 
fourth of the time. The following year he divided his time equally 
between this church and the one at Oxford. He continued in 
charge until 1814. The Rev. Alpheus Geer of Waterbury then took 
charge of the parish, and preached there one-third of the time. This 
arrangement continued until 1S30, when Mr. Geer left Waterbury. 

In 1832 the church was taken down and removed to a place near 
its present position, at the centre of Naugatuck. It had never been 
finished inside. It was now completed and was duly consecrated on 
June 8, 1832. During the interval occupied in removing and finish- 
. ing it up, services were held in a hall in the factory of W. C. DeForest, 
which was fitted up by him for the purpose. During this period the 
Rev. William A. Curtis and the Rev. T. J. Davis successively minis- 
tered here, dividing their time between this parish and Bethany. 

On July 21, 1833, the Rev. Oliver Hopson began his ministry. 
He was the first resident rector, and after the first year gave his 
whole time to the parish. His connection with it lasted nearly 
fourteen years and until after Naugatuck became a separate town. 

EPISCOPACY IN MIDDLEBURV. 

A considerable number of the members of the Gunntown parish were a^^parently 
residents of Middlebury. Al the time of the removal of the building to Naugatuck 
centre, one of the reasons given was that a new parish had been formed in Middle- 
bury. We learn from the journals of the annual Protestant Episcopal Convention 
that a parish at Middlebury, without name, was admittted in 1830. It appears to 
have been mostly under the care of the Rev. Oliver Hopson, mentioned above. In 
1835 the bishop reports twelve persons contirmed there. In 1841 Mr. Hopson 
reports that " his engagement terminated at Easter, since which no stated services 
are held there." In 1843 he reports at Naugatuck " nine communicants formerly 
numbered in the Middlebury parish." No further reports appear, and in 1S51 the 
parish was dropped from the list. It is supposed to have owed its existence mainly 
to the efforts of Larmon Townsend, a merchant at Gunntown, near the church, 
who afterward removed his business and residence to Middlebury. He was an 
ardent "churchman," and frequently officiated as a lay-reader. He died May 11, 
1858, aged eighty-one years. 



CHAPTER XLII. 

THE GRAND STREET CEMETERY EARLY BURIALS AND GRAVE-DIGGERS 

REMOVALS TO RIVERSIDE PROTESTS AGAINST NEGLECT — S. M. 

JUDD'S MAP — KATHARINE PRICHARD'S WORK SOME OLD HEAD- 
STONES ENLARGEMENTS CONVEYED TO THE CITY PROTESTS 

AGAINST DESECRATION — STONES AND REMAINS RESCUED THE 

BRONSON LIBRARY IN POSSESSION PINE HILL AND HILLSIDE IN 

NAUGATUCK NORTHBURY, WESTBURY 4ND FARMINGBURY CEME- 
TERIES — EAST FARMS GUNNTOWN MIDDLEBURY BUCK's HILL 

BROCKETT — WOOSTER A HISTORY OF BELLS— BELL RINGING 

TOLLING FOR DEATHS OTHER PRACTICES. 

THE GRAND STREET CEMETERY. 

rHE earliest mention that has been noticed upon our records 
of a burial place in Waterbury is in 1695, as follows: "The 
town grants to Edmund Scott a parcel of land lying within 
the common fence, butting east on the burying-yard, north on the 
fence, west on the highway." It has already been mentioned, on 
page 235, that the custom prevailed at an early date of appropriat- 
ing the foot of the minister's garden for a burial-place; and as Mr. 
Peck's house-lot extended to present Grand street — the land at first 
occupied by this cemetery being a continuation of the same — there 
is no doubt that the practice was followed here. This was the only 
place of burial within the township until 1709. There had died 
during this time, besides the Rev. Mr. Peck, ten of the proprietors 
of the town, two wives and mothers, four young men, and, at least, 
fifteen children. Of their graves, the only memorial that remains 
is the gravestone of young Benjamin Barnes, pictured on page 173. 
The office of grave-digger seems to have been filled by appoint- 
ment, with the other town offices, at the yearly December meeting, 
upon occasional years; Benjamin Barnes being the first person so 
chosen — in 1700. Edmund vScott's name is next mentioned, he hav- 
ing filled the office in 1708, 1717, 1720 and 1722; Richard Porter in 
1711, 1712 and 1713; Thomas Richason until 17 16; Samuel Barnes in 
1719; Moses Bronson in 1724, and in 1725 it is recorded that "it 
was left with the townsmen to procure somebody to do it." John 
Welton dug the graves in 1726, 1727 and 1729; after the latter date 
the only appointments on record are: "Jonathan vScott, son of 
Edmund," for 1737; and for 173S "James Pritchard was made choice 
of to dig the graves as there shall be occasion." 



BURYING GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS. 667 

From this time until near the close of the century we know little 
of the history of this place. " Buryino-.yard hill," " Ram pasture " 
and " Ram Pasture lane " are referred to in deeds and layouts of 
land; but whose hands prepared the last (alas! not the last) resting- 
places of our beloved ancestors, tradition does not tell us. Judge 
Bennet Bronson left a manuscript list of about six hundred deaths, 
which he says was copied from Captain Benjamin Upson's account. 
(See Ap. p. 158.) From this we infer that Benjamin Upson was the 
sexton from 1797 until his death in 1834, or nearly to that time. 
John vS. Tuttle probably followed Upson, and Ard Warner succeeded 
Tuttle. Henry Garry Hotchkiss became sexton in 1843 and had 
charge of the ground until he left town in i860 or 1861. The JVater- 
luirv American s-a.\d of him: "During the time that he has had the 
charge he has done all that was in his power, with the limited means 
granted him by the selectmen, to keep it free from brush and attend 
to the necessary repairs, for which he states that he has received 
very inadequate remuneration."* Sturges M. Judd was the custo- 
dian of the place from 1862 until its destruction in 1891. He reports 
that the first interment that took place under his charge was that 
of Henry Grilley, aged eighty-nine years, on January 30, 1862. 

Soon after the opening of Riverside cemetery, in 1853, re- 
movals from the old to the new place of burial were begun, and the 
old place soon showed the effects thereof. "Re-opened graves, 
with fragments of coffins left uncovered " in them, and overturned 
head and foot stones, became features of the place, and before 
many years had passed, the ground was overgrown with weeds, 
briars and bushes, save that a few careful hands kept in order the 
graves of their buried friends and relatives. E. B. Cooke from 
time to time called public attention to its condition in the American, 
and in June, 1875, the Rev. Dr. Anderson suggested, in a Sunday 
evening lecture to his congregation, a plan for preserving the head- 
stones and beautifying the enclosure after the manner of old Eng- 
lish church yards, but his words fell upon stony ground. Some 
time thereafter, certain persons petitioned the legislature for per- 
mission to extend Church street to Meadow street, which was 
granted. On April 27, 1884, Dr. Anderson delivered another dis- 
course upon this and other burial places in the township, in which 
he said: 

It is a closed up and desolate place, right in the heart of our city. At the same 
time, it is not only one of the most conspicuous within our limits, but one of the 
most desirable. It seems eminently fitted for some public use, in which living men 
can take an interest. The people of Waterbury, it seems to me, should never let 
it go to be used for business purposes; but why not set it apart for a public park, 
and place in the centre a building worthy to serve as the home of our public library ? 



*He died May 23, 1867, and was buried not far from the Hall street gate. 



668 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



. . . If Ave can thus make use of this ancient and now neglected burial place, 
and at the same time preserve every vestige of historical record which it contains, 
why should we not do so ? . . . 

About a year ago, with a laborious care which only those can fully appreciate who 
have attempted a similar work, Sturges ]\I. Judd procured and prepared the data 
for a complete map of the Grand street burymg ground. This map when finished 
will aim to contain every recognizable grave in the entire enclosure, those graves 
which have inscribed headstones being clearly distinguished from the others. 

Mr. Judd's map was accompanied by a record of the names and 
ages of the persons so interred, as found upon the headstones, and 
a li.st, so far as known to Mr. Judd, of persons there buried, without 
monumental stones — including the Roman Catholic cemetery. In 
1890 and 1891, a copy of the entire inscriptions upon the stones — 
not including the Roman Catholic portion— was made by Katharine 
Prichard. Julius Gay of Farmington also made a transcript of 
names, dates and ages in 1885. A comparison of these lists shows that 
no stones had disappeared between 1885 and 1890. Miss Prichard's 

record of 1890 gives a few names 
not noted by Mr. Gay, and about 
fifty not given by Mr. Judd. 

A word may be said of some 
of the older stones. That of 
Benjamin Barnes 
has already been 
noticed ; the next 
in age is lettered 
as in the margin, it 
being the stone set 
up by Deacon Judd in loving 
remembrance of his daughter, 
Sarah ; and it is interesting to 
note that no older one bearing 
a date was to be seen when Fred- 
erick J. Kingsbury was a boy. 
The name of Thomas Hikcox, 
the second Waterbury deacon, 
was upon the third oldest, the 
date 1728. This stone was buried 
in the great transformation. Per- 
haps the stone that will interest 
the greatest number of readers 

GKA\ESTOMC OF HANNAH HOPKINS. r a.1 • TT' i ' i1 i- C TT ^ 

of this History is that or Han- 
nah Hopkins, wife of John, the miller, and fore-mother of a long 
line of distinguished men. Her descendants to-day are many, and 







BURYING GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS. 669 

- it is a matter of resfret that her maiden name is 



D OC 8 



diNAH 
bRovnson; 




s w 


a Iun-I6 


1738 



M I unknown. She died May 3, 1730, Another old stone, 

not identified, is inscribed as shown in the margin. 

It might be Michael, son of Thomas Judd, had the 

J730 date been 1734. Joseph Nichols died March 10, 1733. 

^ Perhaps the most curious of these early stones was a 

small field stone about six inches 
thick, lettered on both sides as here 
shown. Dinah was the first wife of 
Lieutenant Josiah Bronson, who was 
grandfather of Silas Bronson. A 
stone with the inscription here given 

marked the resting-place of Samuel Welton, son of 
George. Mrs. Thomas Judd also died in 1738. 

These stones comprise all that were found in 1890 
bearing dates prior to 1740. There were forty-four 
bearing dates between 1740 and 1760. The stones 
placed at the graves of the persons who died in the 
great sickness of 1749 and 1750 (see page 370) were of one pattern, 
though varying in size. All were pointed, and were of a gray color. 
The carved red sand-stones, with cherub's faces — in one instance 
crowned — came in use after 1750,* and marble about 1800. 

The number of persons whose age was above seventy years is 
150; of these, fifty-five were between eighty and ninety years of 
age, and the following fourteen over ninety: Mrs. William Adams, 
94; Mrs. Jonathan Baldwin, 97; Amasa Bronson, loi; Mrs. Ezra 
Bronson, 91; Thomas Bronson, 92; Timothy Clark, 92; Mrs. Stephen 
Hotchkiss, 94; John Judd, 98; Captain Samuel Judd, 91; Joseph 
Leavenworth, 92; Tamar, his wife, 93; David Prichard, Sr., nearly 
102; George Prichard, brother of David, 97; Ebenezer Warner, 94. 

The following lines were engraved upon the gravestones of two 
young men, brothers, who died more than sixty years ago. On the 

one: 

The Genius of music beamed forth in this youth, 
Of earth's fading endowments a sad mournful truth, 
But his soft busy eye shall forever be bright, 
When sun, moon and stars all cease of their light. 

On the other: 

O when pale death his features spread 
How deep the pang. O! grief, he's dead 
But hark! his silent whispers deep: 
Parents and mourners, cease to weep. 
Go and prepare in death to sleep. 

* See note on page 380, 



670 HISTORY OF WATKUBURY. 

Another young man died away from home in 1823: 

He died among strangers no kindred near 
To wipe away a falling tear 
Oh Lord how oft thy wrath appears 
And cuts off our expected years. 

But not all the epitaplis are of this style, as note the two following: 

Sleep on dear youth, heaven's high almighty King: 
Hath to eternal summer changed thy Spring. 

Know thou, Oh Stranger to the fame 
Of this much lov'd, much honored name 
For none that knew him need be told — 
A warmer heart, death ne'er made cold. 

Some of the burial customs of the older time are touchingly 
referred to by Horace Hotchkiss in a contribution to the Waterbitry 
America /I in 1S76: 

I well remember as a child, six years old, being taken out of bed one cold 
autumn night [October 28, i8o8] to stand beside the death-bed of my mother. . 

. . Afterward, as she lay in her coffin, my childish curiosity was occupied in 
studying the initials formed on the lid with brass-headed nails, as was then the 
custom. ]\Ien came, and taking up the bier, carried the coffin to its resting place in 
the old burying ground, while we followed on foot. 

I remember when a boy often examining the old headstones. Some were 
rough from the field, others were so overgrown with moss that, until it was 
removed, neither name nor quaint epitaph was traceable, making it true that " the 
dead forgotten lie." In the custom of that time, the coffin was borne to the grave 
on men's shoulders, in some cases two or three miles or more.* 

The first enlargement of this burial ground was made in June, 
1805, when an exchange was effected with Mrs. vSarah Leavenworth, 
widow of the Rev. Mark Leavenworth, by which the town received 
about an acre of land on the east, and Mrs. Leavenworth twenty- 
five rods on the south and $25. In 1823 (in accordance with a state 
law) the care of the grounds passed into the control of the First 
School society. On January 31, 1842, this society appointed a com- 
mittee " to purchase one and one-fourth acres of land south of the 
burying ground, at $50 per acre, to grade the ground, to build a suit- 
able fence, to repair the hearse and hearse-house, and make si:ch 
other repairs as to expend the two mill tax laid by the society this 
evening." " Mr. Warner was also authorized to purchase a hearse 
and pall" (see Volume II, page 489, note). The land just mentioned 
belonged to Edward G. Field and was conveyed to the society 
through his guardian, Joel R. Hinman, in 1843. 

* In April, 1805, Joseph Payne's coffin was brought to this cemetery, on neighbors' shoulders from 
Columbia (now Prospect), for burial beside his kindred. A violent thunder-shower came up as they neared a 
large barn standing on present Dublin street, the only shelter within reach, and all took refuge in it until the 
shower had passed over. 



BURYING GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS. 671 

The land occupied by the Roman Catholics for their earliest 
cemetery lay south of the south fence of the Grand street burying^ 
yard, and was purchased from J. M. L. Scovill in 1847. Entrance to 
it was gained by a road from Grand street through the older bury- 
ing ground (see Volume II, page 732). 

On April 26, 18S2, the legislature by special act authorized and 
empowered the town of Waterbury by the majority of its selectmen 
to convey its interest in the old Grand street cemetery to the city 
of Waterbury. The act, while providing for the purchase of indi- 
vidual interests in the old burial grounds, directed as follows: 

The city shall make arrangements for suitable places in other cemeteries to 
which the remains and monuments remaining in said old burial grounds may be 
removed, in all cases where the friends of those buried in the old burial grounds do 

not provide for the same Upon the passage of the final decree and the 

payment to the parties of the respective sums, and [let this be noted] the removal 
of the remaining bodies and monuments from the old burial grounds, said old 
burial grounds shall be used as a public park by the city of Waterbury, or the same 
may be used for any suitable public building or other public purpose. 

This act was ratified by a vote of the city in May, 1890. During 
the next few months, the only persons who publicly protested 
against this proposed action, so far as known to the writer, were 
Sarah J. Prichard, Mrs. Lucy Bronson Dudley of New York, and 
Mrs. Gilbert Hotchkiss; but the advocates for the erection of the 
Bronson Library upon the site in question were many. Miss Prich- 
ard made the following " appeal " for the preservation of the ancient 
burying yard of Waterbury in the American of August 28: 

At a date and in a manner to us unknown, but at a period very early in the 
history of this town, there was set apart on the hill known to the founders of Water- 
bury as Burying Yard hill, a certain parcel of land for use as a place of burial, 
wherein for the space of an entire generation all the dead, so far as is known, of 
the plantation of Mattatuck and town of Waterbury were laid. 

On Friday, March 27, 1801, Joseph Hopkins died at New Haven while in attend- 
ance as senior assistant judge of the county court. Three days after the death of 
Mr. Hopkins, who had been buried outside the limits of the ancient burying 
yard, and within the land of his friend and neighbor, Mrs. Sarah Leavenworth, 
that lady conveyed by deed to his heirs 648 square feet of land, including his 
grave and also that of his wife, which land was to be used " for the purpose of a 
burying ground for the said Joseph Hopkins, Esq., deceased, and his family and 
their descendants forever, with liberty to enclose the same in such manner as they 
shall deem expedient." 

Since iSoi, three enlargements have been made to the original burying-yard. 
The deeds conveying the land have, in all cases, specified the use to which it was 
to be devoted, notably the last one, bearing date May 6, 1847, in which James M. 
L. Scovill did convey by deed to William Tyler, bishop of the Roman Catholic 
diocese of Hartford, m trust for the Roman Catholics of Waterbury, a certain tract 
of land adjoining the burying ground. Said deed contained the following words: 



672 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

' ' Provided, and this deed is upon the condition that the above described premises 
are to be used and occupied for the purpose of a burying ground and no other pur- 
pose." Should the Roman Catholics relinquish their right to this land, it would, 
without doubt, revert to the heirs of J. M. L. Scovill, and the same dilemma would 
occur in an attempt to divert the other lands from their specified uses. The heirs of 
Joseph Hopkins are many and are scatered far and wide throughout the United 
States. The heirs of the " inhabitants of Waterbury in 1805 " are tens of thousands, 
dwelling no man knoweth where, and the heirs of the planters of Mattatuck, the 
owners of the ancient " God's acre," no man maj number. 

Let us look for a moment into the mortal hi.story of this bit of land, and ask : 
Are we willing to let it go ? For more than a century, there were gathered into 
the western portion of this most ancient place of burial within the township the 
men and women who braved the perils and endured the toils and bore with heroic 
fortitude the untold severity of the struggle with flood and wilderness, with want 
and woes that would appall stouter hearts than beat with us to-day. Here lie the 
mothers who guarded their children alike from peril by beast of the forest and 
stealthy tread of outraged Indian. Here were gathered for their long rest, in the 
place of their choice, the men who wrought mightily for us, in ways that need no 
mention, and whose integrity of purpose is the chief glory that glistens so brightly 
above our commonwealth to-day. These men and women, who lie beneath the sod 
in marked and unmarked graves, are they who trod the wilderness to come hither, 
who first turned the soil to make it glad with harvest, who built the first houses and 
created the first homes, surrounded by the hills that shut them solemnly in. They 
reared the first house for the worship of God in this then great wilderness. It was 
they who gathered sadly on Burying Yard hill and made within this ground the 
unknown grave of the first unknown dead of their number, who Avas borne — we 
know not when, we know not how — to this lonely place of burial 

Here lie the mortal remains of men whose names, as the centuries grow, will rise, 
as the number of them increases, into higher places in the estimation of coming 
generations. Already men and women are coming hither, are making long jour- 
neys to the old burying yard, to search therein for some memorial that shall enable 
them to say : " This is the spot where lies my ancestor of honored memory." 

Let us beautify the place where rest the proprietors of Mattatuck, where lies 
the first minister of the town, the Rev. Jeremiah Peck; where lies his successor, 
the Rev. John Southmayd, whose services as public recorder deserve unbounded 
gratitude ; and his successor, the Rev. ]\Iark Leavenworth, whose long pastorate 
deserves a long, unmolested rest. Let us honor the graves of our early physicians, 
Dr. Daniel Porter and the aged Dr. Ephraim Warner. We will name but one 
name more, save that of Deacon Thomas Judd, and that name shall be Hannah, 
the mother of the Rev. Samuel Hopkins and the grandmother of Samuel Hopkins, 
D. D., the sound of whose name and the light of whose life should keep alive and 
illumine the place of his birth forever. There are heroes lying here; men who lived 
and fought and died, full of patriotic love of country. There is one family name 
that has come down through all the generations from the time of 167S, and is there 
engraved on seventy-seven tombstones that still stand despite the ruin into, which 
the place has fallen, in testimony of the faithfulness with which the Bronsons 
remembered their dead. 

Oh, let not the coming generations that shall return to Waterbury reproach us of 
to-day in that we let go the one thing that we ought to prize most of all that we 
have of inheritance — the graves of our fathers, of the men who lay down to die in 
the full trust that the place they had prepared for their burial would remain for- 



BURYING GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS. 673 

ever inviolate. Shall we prove ourselves less true to our trust than the men of 
Boston and the men of Hartford, who turn proudly to their ancient places of burial, 
and would not bestow them, even to hold the tomb of a Grant, or the monument of 
a Washington ? 

Mrs. Dudley's protest appeared in the Republican of September 3, in 
the following- emphatic terms: 

I have been notified, as a lineal descendant of both John Bronson and Captain 
Samuel Hickox, that there is talk in Waterbury of converting the old graveyard 
into a public park. It seems incredible that the last decade of the enlightened 
nineteenth century should record an idea of that kind. I have seventy-seven rela- 
tives buried in that old graveyard in Waterbury, and I send to that town seventy- 
seven protests against desecration — one for each closed mouth. Their toiling hands 
started your manufactories; their eyes beheld your pleasant valley, and they fought 
for it. Their ears heard Indian yells and English guns, and yet when their worn 
out bodies sought repose in six feet of ground some of this generation of Waterbury 
people think it is too much to allow them. Who will add to my seventy-seven protests? 

Lucy Bronson Dudley. 

Mrs. Hotchkiss wrote as follows — also in the Republican : 

Will you allow me space to add my protest to ^Nlrs. Dudley's against the desecra- 
tion of the old Grand street burying ground. I have two grandfathers, two grand- 
mothers, a father and stepfather, also many other relatives, buried there. ]ilany 
times has nty grandmother told me of the soldiers of the Revolution, as they passed 
her father's house on the way from Boston to Fishkill, or vice ver-sa, stopping there 
for provisions or staying over night, or both, and always keeping a guard. 
The present generation can hardl}- realize the sufferings and hardships of those 
early days of the soldiers and of those remaining at home, and it seems to me the 
valuable ground that they secured for their last resting place is none too good for their 
venerated dust to remain in, undesecrated by this generation, who have not jDatri- 
otisni enough to beautify and keep it as the most sacred spot within the city, and 
thus to honor those who fought and worked for the liberties we to-day enjoy. Let 
those who have been endeavoring to obliterate these sacred graves pause ere it is too' 
late, for they may yet be buried in Waterbury themselves, and a future generation 
may follow their example by endeavoring to make a public park of Riverside; for 
it is less than twenty-five years since there were interments in this old j^ard. But 
no ! away with such thoughts ! and let every sober, conscientious man and woman 
arise and say. Let us honor, defend and beautify the ground where our beloved 
dead are laid, even if that ground happens to be located in the city of Waterbury. 

Emma Hotchkiss 

On January 4, 1891, the town deeded the land to the city (see 
Volume II, page 74). On April 24, Charles R. Baldwin, the mayor 
of the city, complied with the requirements of the above-men- 
tioned act only so far as to cause excavations to be made and the 
remaining stones to be sunken out of sight — sometimes, but not 
always, over the graves to which they belonged. In some cases 
two or three stones were buried together. The remainder were 
grouped in what was once the vault. April 26, 1S91 — truly Water- 
43 



674 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



bury's " Black Friday " ! * The grounds were subsequently graded, 
the trees closely trimmed and a retaining wall built on Meadow 
street, and a portion of the land was conveyed to the board of 
agents of the Bronson library, as appears from the deed recorded 
in Volume CXXVI of the Land Records. 

When the excavation for the cellar of the Bronson Library 
building was made, many stones which the city had buried were 
taken out of the ground in a fair state of preservation; but no one 
cared for them, and the oldest and most valuable, lying scattered 
on the surface, were crushed under cart wheels. f Such as remain 
are now in the cellar of the library. The bones exhumed were 
buried, after much delay, in the southwest corner of the lot deeded 
to the library. 

A record of the bodies removed in the spring of 1891 was kept 
by N. J. Welton. vSome were taken out of town, some removed to 
Mill Plain cemetery, and others to Riverside. Among them were 
the remains of Susanna, wife of Thomas Bronson (and great-grand- 
mother of Dr. Henry Bronson), who had been buried 150 years. 

OTHER EARLY CEMETERIES. 

PINE HILL BURYING GROUND. 

The second place of burial within the limits of the town was at 
Judd"s Meadows (see page 278). The oldest legible inscription to 
be seen to-day is "A. Lewis, 1740," which refers to Abram, son of 
Deacon Joseph Lewis, who died in December, 1740, aged twenty 
years; the latest is: " Sarah B. Terrel [wife of Horatio] died October 
14, 1836, aged 29 years." In a chart of this plot of land made by Wil- 
liam Ward of Naugatuck, there are forty-four recognizable graves, 
thirty-three of which are marked with legible inscriptions. Of the 
others, it is believed that four, bearing initials, one of which is " B " 
in each case, mark the graves of the four children of John Barnes 
who died in the great sickness of 1749. Eight of the persons whose 
ages are given were over seventy years of age, and two — Gideon 
Hikcox and Sarah, his wife — had lived more than ninety years. 
Fifteen of the stones bear the name of Terrell. 

In 1890, William Ward, Willard Hopkins and James S. Lewis 
were appointed a committee by the town of Naugatuck to build 

* Dr. Anderson on that day rescued the remains of the Rev. John Southmayd, and later the remains and 
tombstones of the Rev. Mark Leavenworth and Timothy Hopkins were preserved and removed. Mrs. Lucy 
Bronson Dudley had before this caused to be made a facsimile of the stone of the Rev. John Southmayd, 
which was broken several years ago. See further in " The Churches of Mattatuck," pp. 7, 8, 257-261. 

+ See an article signed J. A., in the American of May 26, 1893. 



BURYING GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS. 675 

a wall on the south boundary of this cemetery, also to secure the 
bank on the west side. The sum expended was $650. J. H. Whitte- 
more and Mr. Ward were recently appointed by the directors of the 
Grove Cemetery association to report a plan to improve the grounds 
which they have not yet completed. Through the efforts of Mr. 
Ward, this ancient burial place has been associated with the Hill- 
side cemetery of Naugatuck, as a beneficiary of $10,000, raised by 
inhabitants of the town of Naugatuck, and placed with the Grove 
Cemetery association as trustee. 

HILLSIDE CEMETERY. 

The first grave made in Hillside cemetery was for Harvey, infant 
son of Deacon Elisha Stevens, upon land that wStevens owned near 
his own house. The date was March 9, 1795. Five years later (Feb- 
ruary 7, 1800) Deacon wStevens, for $6.25, deeded to the town, through 
its selectmen, sixty-three rods of land in Salem society, "lying a 
little southeast of my dwelling-house, and where it has been im- 
proved for a burying ground, . . . butting northwest and south 
on my own land, reserving one and one-half rods square, 
where I and my family have made some burials." A later deed — 
May 12, 1830 — from the heirs of Elisha vStevens, conveys for $48.75, 
thirty-five rods on the north side and ninety-nine rods on the south 
side of the land deeded in 1795, "reserving to ourselves six rods 
adjoining the one and one-half already reserved." This yard has 
been " set in order " without and within through the liberality and 
under the direction of Mr. Whittemore, and is now in the care of 
the Grove Cemetery association. 

NORTHBURY BURYING PLACES. 

The earlier of the two burying yards in Northbury parish was 
in present Thomaston. It was laid out according to a town act of 
December 9, 1735, the land having been purchased from Elnathan 
Taylor (see page 363). The only right that Taylor reserved was 
" a right and liberty for myself and my heirs to bury our dead in 
it." The Town hall stands upon the land once occupied by this 
cemetery. 

The burying yard upon Plymouth hill was originally a part of 
the village green. The earliest burials seem to have taken place 
about 1749; at least the oldest stones bear date of that year, and the 
ground is in a good state of preservation. 

WESTBURY BURYING YARD. 

The reader will find on page 329 the record of the layout of this 
place of graves and a word-picture of the first burial there, the date 



676 HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

of which was April i, 1741. The original list of deaths kept by 
Timothy Judd is in possession of his descendant, James A. Skilton 
of New York, and is the oldest record of that nature which remains 
to us. It is a small book, measuring four and a half by three and 
a half inches, and has lost one leaf in the front and a portion of one 
leaf at the back. Mr. Skilton thinks that when the Rev. N. S. Rich- 
ardson printed in 1845 his Record of Mortality in Watertown, he 
evidently had not seen this book, as his memorandum differs in 
many ways from the original; also that his father, Dr. Avery J. 
Skilton of Troy, N. Y., had not seen it when he made his copy in an 
account book kept by James Skilton from 1802 until 1848. "At what 
time these records were so copied, or from what originals, I have," 
says Mr. vSkilton, "been unable to learn." A few of the items of 
interest found in the original and not in the copies are the follow- 
ing: 

Sept. 28, 1761, Dropt down dead in the path uncle Tho. Upson. 

Nov. 16, 1764, Died uncle John Root of Kinsington in his seventy-ninth year. 

^larch 8, 1765, was taken in a fit at the Widow Stow's, Doct. Mun of Woodbury 
& died in about seven minutes. 

June 2, 176S. was taken with an Appoplectic & died Immediately the wife of 
Stephen Judd, Lydia by name. 

June 8, 1773. Died with the consumption, in his passage from_Sandacroix, Tim- 
othy Richards. 

July 28, 1 754: Died Serjant David vStrickland. 

March 15, 1766: Died old Mr. Joseph Prichard [of Milford]. 

July 30, 1768: Died, Serg. Caleb Clark. 

June 27, 1769: Died at Stephen Matthews^ house, James Parker of Chester, a 
boy of about ten years of age. 

May 7, 1770: Died in a fitt of Appoplex, as the jury adjudged, Mr. Benjamin 
Wetmore. 

Sept. 21, I77I'. Died Jack Negro Man to Benjamin Richards. 

Aug. 14, 1772: Died with the kick of a colt, within a little more than 24 hours, 
the eldest child of John foot, aged 5 years. 

January 17, 1773: Died James Outis (?) a Tranchent Person at the widow 
Edwards^ house. 

January 13, 1774: Died Abi, eldest child to Jacob foot .... and the same day 
Justus Daley's leg was cut off. 

February 5, 1774: Abijah Garnsey's leg was cut off. 

June 7, 1775: Died Bethel, son to William Scovill, killed by a Trees falling on him. 

December 14, 1776: Died Daniel Tyler's Junr, two children, which were all he 
had, and were buried at Break Neck. 

March 23, 1777: Died Ensign James Smith. 

March 21, 177S: Was killed with the fall of a tree, Edward Scovill, Junr. 

Oct. 16, 1779: Was killed with a cart the only son and child of William Scovill. 

Jan. II, 1 781: Was drow'd in a well, a son to Eldad Andrus. 

June 5, 1781: Died Seth Blake. (Last entry.) 

For other deaths, taken from this book, see pages 437 and 467. 



BURTINO O ROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS. 677 



FARMINGBURY CEMETERIES. 



At a town meeting- held December 31, 1764, "Captain George 
Nichols and Captain Stephen Upson, Jr., were chosen a committee 
to go out eastward near Joseph Atkins' to view and purchase half 
an acre of land upon the town cost, in that neighborhood where they 
shall think it most convenient for a burying yard " (see page 402). 
In Bronson's History (page 229) this date is given as 1734, and the 
statement is made that the above action referred to East Farms. 
Joseph Atkins lived near the present centre of Wolcott, and this 
purchase was the beginning of the Wolcott Centre burying ground. 
The oldest inscribed stone standing therein is to the memory of 
Lieutenant Heman Hall; the date is 1769. On April 13, 1795? ^ com- 
mittee was appointed to confer, and contract if possible, with Wil- 
liam Stevens " for a small tract of land to sec^uester to the use of 
the public for a burying ground, and to take a deed of him, or to 
report to the town." On June 16, 1797 — the year after Farmingbury 
society became the town of Wolcott — Waterbury directed that Wol- 
cott should be paid ^3, los., to be applied to the payment in part of 
their burying ground. In 1797, Stevens still laid claim to a portion 
of the burying ground, and Wolcott appointed a committee to settle 
with him, which was finally accomplished in December, 1798. 
Stevens' name appears on the Waterbury tax list of 1793 as a resi- 
dent of Southington. 

In March, 1772, the society of Farmingbury appointed three 
grave diggers, indicating the existence of three graveyards, one of 
which, at the centre, John Barrett had charge of for many years. 
The second we should not fail to mention, since, whether within 
Waterbury limits or not, Waterbury residents were there interred. 
It is on Pike's hill, and but six stones bearing inscriptions remain. 
The names are Alcox, Blakeslee and Bracket; the dates are from 
1776 to 1791. 

EAST FARMS CEMETERY. 

"It is supposed," says Sturges M. Judd, " that the first two inter- 
ments at East Farms were of two Revolutionary soldiers who died 
here on the march from Newport, R. I., to Newburg, N. Y., in 1776." 
That this tradition may be correct save for the date, is inferred 
from the petition which Dr. Timothy Porter presented in 1786 to 
the General Assembly, in which he states that in September, 1777, 
a portion of the army, under command of Colonel Angel of Rhode 
Island, passed through Waterbury; that William Edwards, on ac- 
count of a wound in his ankle, by which he was in danger of losing 
life or limb, was left under Porter's care. Porter was assured that 



678 HISTORY OF WATERBUR7. 

whenever he should present his bill to Captain Thomas Button, 
collector of state taxes, his taxes would be abated; but Button kept 
the bill for three years and then returned it. 

On January 31, 1780, a committee was appointed by the town to 
purchase one-fourth acre on the request of Captain Phineas Castle. 
On April i, was surveyed "a piece of ground, five by eight rods, at 
the East farm," which Joseph Beach sold on April 28 for fifteen shil- 
lings, described as " in my meadow, a little southwest of my dwell- 
ing house, with the privilege of passing to and from said burying- 
yard from the Country road" (see page 448). The oldest inscribed 
stone seems to be that of Experience, the wife of Joseph Beach, who 
died September 20, 1789. 

In 1855, the plot was enlarged by a gift of land from Charles J. 
Pierpont. By an act of the legislature passed in 1878, the East Farms 
Cemetery corporation was organized. 

GUNNTOWN CEMETERY. 

Nathaniel Gunn, who died October 25, 1769, was buried in Pine 
Hill cemetery, as was his first wife, Sarah, who died in 1756. His 
widow — also Sarah — was buried at Gunntown in 1797. These facts 
have led to the belief that this burying-yard was not laid out until 
after 1760, and probably not until after the organization of the 
Gunntown Episcopal church in 1784. Br. Enos Osborn, born after 
1737) gave the ground to the Episcopal society, but after the church 
was removed to Salem, some rights must have remained with the 
Osborn family, for Enos Adams, a descendant of the family, in i860 
deeded it to the town of Naugatuck. 

The oldest person here buried is Mrs. Bavid Peck of Berby, who 
died in 1867, aged more than one hundred years. The earliest death 
here recorded is that of a child of Noah and Abigail (Gunn) Sco- 
vill, who died in 1790, although there seem to be some older graves 
unmarked. The young man from whose gravestone the following 
inscription is taken, was of marked ability, and was in charge, at the 
time of his death, of workmen who were building a church steeple: 

Erected to the memory of John A. Smith, son of John and Jennett Smith, who 
was killed instantly at Madison, Ct., by falling from the steeple of a church. May 
18, 1S3S, aged 20 years. 

" Beneath this sacred motild, rest, hapless youth 

At whose disastrous end e'en strangers wept, 
Whose dying bed was the cold earth, and whose 

Last groan nor friend nor parent herd — 
Parental love, denied to sooth that hour, 

O'er thy dear dust this humble stone erects. 
To bear thy precious name and publish 

To the passing traveller thy woe." 



BURYING GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS. 679 

After the church edifice at Gunntown was removed to the village 
of Salem, and the new Congregational church was its neighbor, it is 
said that Daniel Beecher conveyed to the Episcopal society land in 
the rear of its church for a burial-yard, and that for a considerable 
time it was in use.* Removals from it were made to Hillside cem- 
eterv, while other graves still remain under and about the horse- 
sheds now belonging to that church. f 

MIDDLEBURV BURYING PLACES. 

The earliest place of burial in Middlebury, laid out in 1771 (see 
page 408), has entirely disappeared. Two stones only in the pres- 
ent graveyard are known to have been removed from the older one; 
those of two daughters of Captain Isaac and Mary (Bracket) Bron- 
Son, who died in 1776 and 1777. The following vote, passed on 
January 27, 1794, seems to refer to the present cemetery: "Voted 
that the petition of Mr. Eli Bronson, praying for a burying ground 
in Middlebury society, be referred to the selectmen, with power to 
grant said petition and make such compensation to the proprietor 
of said ground as they think best." 

buck's hill cemetery. 

On December 30, 17S9, "on motion of John Welton, Esq., to have 
a suitable piece of ground sequestered for a burying yard in the 
northern part of this town, it was voted to request the selectmen 
to choose out a suitable piece of ground and purchase it for the 
above purpose if they think prudent." A few stones are standing 
in the Buck's Hill cemetery, of dates before 1800. Additions have 
been made to the original layout, and the evergreen trees which 
surround it were presented by Joseph Welton in i860. 

BROCKET (or POTTER) CEMETERY. 

On March 27, 1813, Zenas Brocket deeded to his son-in-law, the 
Rev. vSamuel Potter, certain pieces of land, one "a little southeast 
of Spectacle pond so called, containing about six acres, in which is 
included a burying ground of twelve rods of land, which is not 
conveyed by this deed." The earliest burials therein were probably 
the two sons of Mr. Potter, one of whom died in 1803, the other in 
1804. Franklin Potter, the present owner, has twice enlarged it, 
and its present dimensions are nearly one acre. It is used largely 
as a place of burial by the inhabitants of Simonsville and that 
vicinity. 

* See note on page 645. 

+ It is said that a complete list of the burials in Gunntown cemetery is in existence, but it is not avail- 
able for reference at this time. 



68o HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 

WOOSTER CEMETERY. 

This is a small plot of ground lying south of the Potter burial 
ground, now within the limits of the town of Naugatuck. The ear- 
liest interment was that of Walter Wooster, who died July 21, 1829, 
aged eighty-two years; the latest Sylvester B. Bailey, aged sixty- 
five, in 1892. There seem to have been only about twenty burials, 
nearly all bearing the name of Wooster. 

For an account of cemeteries opened since 1825 see Volume II, 
pages 786 to 789. 

BELLS AND THEIR USES. 

The history of church bells in old New England communities is 
a subject by no means barren of interest, and the ancient customs 
connected with bell-ringing are worth studying. Although it is so 
recently that they have fallen into disuse, there are few to-day who 
know much about them. Their connection with deaths and burials 
was so close that this would seem to be the proper place in which 
to give some account of them. 

Bronson in his History of Waterbury makes the following refer- 
ence (page no) to primitive New England customs: "The drum 
was a favorite instrument among our ancestors, and was put to 
rnany uses. It answered the purpose of a town bell. It called the 
people to meeting on Sundays. It summoned them to the fortified 
houses at night. It gave the signal for the town gatherings on 
public business. It told the people when to turn out 'to burn about 
the common fence.'" The use of the drum as a legal signal for 
sheriff's sales — in which property was advertised "to be sold at 
beat of drum " — has continued until very recently. The Connecti- 
cut statutes of 1866 prescribe this method of giving notice; but 
the daily paper and the town sign-post seem now to have taken the 
place of it. It is quite probable that the drum was used in Water- 
bury for the purposes indicated for at least a hundred years. It 
was gradually superseded by the bell, and the bell having once 
secured an established place, new uses were developed which it 
successfully supplied. 

On page 613 it is remarked that the second meeting-house 
(1729-1796) "apparently had a bell," and that it was probably the 
one sold by the people of Milford, about 1740, "to a society in 
Waterbury." In that case the statement on page 557 of Bronson's 
History, repeated in this volume (p. 599), that the bell of the old 
academy was the first in town, must be incorrect.* 

* For the history of the academy bell see page 600 and Vol. II, p. 519. F. J. Kingsbury, who in his boy- 
hood assisted in taking down this same bell from the belfry of the second or stone academy, after it had 
become permanently injured, says it was pushed from the end of a plank, fell on the hard ground and broke 
into several pieces. 



BURYING GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS. 68 1 

The g-rant " to pay for the bell," made by the First society in 1788 
(p. 613), would seem to indicate either a recent purchase or a long- 
standing- debt, or else payment for the use of the academy bell or 
for ringing it. But in any case, the third meeting-house (1796-1840) 
had not been finished long ere it was furnished with a new one. 
The subscription paper for this bell was in existence in 1S85, but 
has since disappeared. Fortunately, however, it was published in 
the Watcrburv Republican of August 19 of that year, with the entire 
list of the subscribers, and the bill, showing the size and cost of the 
bell. The heading is as follows: 

We, the subscribers, hereby promise to pay to Capt. Benj. Upson, Messrs. John 
Davis and Jesse Hopkins, society's committee, for the purpose of purchasing and 
hanging a bell in the steeple of the meeting-house lately built in the First Society 
in Waterbury, the several sums annexed to our respective names, by the first day 
of December next, provided the sums hereto subscribed shall amount to a sum 
sufficient to purchase a bell that shall weigh six hundred weight, and not exceeding 
six hundred and fifty pounds weight, and hang the same. 

To this agreement, we are told by the Republican, 108 names were 

subscribed, and all but nine had check marks after them indicating 

that payment had been made. " The amounts ranged from four 

shillings to ^3, and the total amount was ^86, 15s., 6d., or about 

$430." The receipt, which we reproduce, shows that the bell finally 

procured was a hundred pounds heavier than the committee at first 

reckoned upon: 

New Haven, March 2d, 1797. 

The First Society of the town of Waterbury, 
To Fenton & Cochran, Dr. 
To a bell weighing seven hundred and forty-eight pounds, at two 

shillings and three pence per pound (eighty-four pounds, three £ s. d. 

shillings), 84 3 o 

Also altering a P. bell weighing 24 pounds at 2-3, 210 

Also two brass gaging boxes weighing four and half pounds at 2 per 

pound, 090 

87 6 o 
Fenton & Cochran. 

Before the purchase of this bell, that on the academy was used 
to some extent as a church bell. The vote of the First society to 
give the Episcopal society the use of the new bell " on all proper 
occasions" has already been referred to (page 618). It probably 
met the requirements of both parishes for many years. No refer- 
ence to a bell on the Episcopal church has been found of earlier 
date than 1823, and there is no indication in the First church 
records until 1827 that the bell of 1797 was not sufficient and satis- 
factory. On March 5 of that year, however, it was "voted that the 



682 HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 

society's committee have liberty to sell the bell of the meeting- 
house at their discretion," and on November i6, 1829, it was " voted 
to lay a tax of one and one-half cents on the dollar on the list of 
1829 to be appropriated to the purchase of a bell, payable the first 
day of March next." Of this proposed purchase there is no further 
mention in the records, but in the Reminiscences of Horace Hotch- 
kiss (already quoted elsewhere), there is an interesting reference to 
to it. He says : 

For some years subsequent to the erection of the two churches, the bell of the 
Congregational church was used for both societies for Sabbath and funeral occa- 
sions. The old bell was at length broken by undue ringing, one Christmas Eve, 
and it was decided to hang a new one before the installation of a pastor which was- 
just about to take place. Mr. Israel Coe sent a bell from New York, but when it 
was tested, on the Saturday previous to the installation, it proved unsatisfactory. 
Determined at all events to have a good bell for the coming occasion, I proposed ta 
Edward Scovill that we should drive over to Hartford, that afternoon, to procure 
one, and return at evening. The weather was intensely cold and the snow was 
drifting heavily, but we equipped ourselves with shovels and blankets, and left 
Waterbury about noon. 

On the Southington plains, in consequence of the drifts, we were obliged to 
shovel the paths for long distances, and reached Hartford only at night-fall. Dur- 
ing the evening we secured a bell whose tones we liked, and at 9 p. m. started on 
our tedious homeward drive of thirty miles over the mountain, with the bell in the 
sleigh, — an additional weight of more than half a ton. By urging the horses and 
by frequent shovelling we reached the brow of the mountain at midnight, but 
beyond that the road was so blockaded that we could proceed no further with the 
sleigh. We resolved to ride home on horseback, leaving our load behind, but on 
attempting it our frequent falls and the bitter cold convinced us that this, too, was 
impossible; so we led the horses to a house about half a mile distant, and arousing 
the occupants, found quarters until the next evening (for although the strict Sab- 
bath laws of my earlier life were not then in force, we were unwilling to give occa- 
sion for scandal because of having travelled on the Sabbath). After sunset on Sun 
day night we extricated our sleigh by aid of oxen and slowly proceeded home. 

The bell was hung on Tuesday, and on Wednesday it rang out a joyous sum- 
mons to the installation. Long afterward it called the people to worship and gave 
them notice of occurring deaths. I think it is but a few years since this last custom 
was dropped in Waterbury. At a funeral the body was carried to the grave on 
men's shoulders. Occasionally the bearers were relieved by others, and as they 
went on, the slow and solemn tones of the passing bell filled the air. (This, I sup- 
pose, was from a Saxon custom notifying the people to pray for the soul of the 
departed.) The bell was also 'rung on week days, at early morning to give notice 
when to rise, at 12 o'clock for the mid-day meal, and at 9 p. m. to indicate the hour of 
retiring. 

The bell procured by Messrs. wScovill and Hotchkiss became in 
its turn unsatisfactory. On December 26, 1853, the society voted 
that the society's committee should be authorized to exchange the 
present bell for a new one, the new one to weigh not less than 1500 
pounds, nor more than 2500. The date at which the exchange was 



BURT mo GROUNDS AND TOLLING BELLS. 685 

made does not appear m the record, but the result was a disappoint- 
ment. The bell was evidently taken "on approval," for on March 
22, 1855, the society took action as follows: 

Voted that the bell now hanging in our church is not satisfactor}^ to iis, and that 
we do not think it for our interest to purchase it. 

Resolved that this society is under no obligation to try another bell from Mr. 
Holbrook's foundry, and that the committee be directed to procure a bell wherever 
they think the interest of the society will be best served. 

Four months later it was still there, or else the society had been dis- 
appointed again; for it was voted (July 16) "that as the bell now 
hangs we are not satisfied with it, — as regards the difificulty of ring- 
ing it and the tone given out when it is tolled, and that the com- 
mittee be instructed to advise Mr. Blake of the feeling, giving him 
an opportunity to remedy the difficulties, if he sees fit." 

The people of St. John's parish were called to more heroic expe- 
riences than these. On the night of January 18, 1857, when the 
steeple of their church was blown down, the bell, which weighed 
nearly 4000 pounds, fell with it. It struck, however, in a pile of 
broken timbers in such a way that it received no injury. But when 
the church was destroyed by fire on the morning of Christmas,, 
1868, the bell was melted and fell in drops. 

An account of the chimes at vSt. John's is given in Volume II, 
p. 620, and in the chapter on music. 

The following account of the somewhat elaborate system of bell- 
ringing which prevailed here for many years has been furnished 
by Mr. Kingsbury: 

Bells were rung for church services, for deaths, for funerals, for fires, for general 
alarms — such as for lost children — and for secular meetings; and the system was so 
complete that it needed only a few strokes to make known the object. 

For church services the peals were in four strokes with a brief interval between 
the second and third. A first bell was rung an hour before the time of service. 
The second bell began ten minutes before the time of service, and after ringing a 
few minutes finished with a slow toll. This second bell and the toll are still in use. 

It was in ringing for a death that the elaborate system I have spoken of was 
most noticeable. When the bell was to be rung to advise the little community that 
death had taken some one away, it was at first slowly tolled, the number of strokes 
indicating the sex and proximate age of the deceased, — namely, three for a girl, 
Wve for a boy, seven for a woman, nine for a man. This having been done, the 
bell was rung for several minutes, the strokes being in groups of two instead of 
four, but in other respects like the ringing for church service. After ringing a suit- 
able time, which was a matter of judgment on the sexton's part, and determined 
by the age and social position of the deceased, the ringer ascended to the belfry 
and, attaching a small rope to the tongue of the bell, tolled the age by pulling the 
tongue against the side of the bell. The age was tolled in groups of tens, with a 
rest of a few seconds after each ten strokes. If we could not decide, before the bell 
ceased who among the persons known to be ill had passed away, the inference was 
that a non resident had been brought here to be buried, and the subject was a 



684 11181011 Y OF WATEUBURY. 

matter of inquiry. Frequently this was shouted to the sexton from below by some 
curious person in the pauses of the bell. The bell was rung in groups of two 
strokes to give notice of the funeral when held in the church, and sometimes when 
held at private houses, and it was very slowl}'- tolled while the body was being car- 
ried on a bier upon men's shoulders to its last resting place. As the town grew 
larger the custom of ringing or tolling the bell for a death was gi-adually given up. 
Not long ago I was making some inquiry as to the time when it ceased, when to my 
sitrprise the bell of St. John's was rung and tolled for Mrs. Palmyra Cotton, who 
had just died in her one hundred and first year. 

Alarm bells were rung in rapid peals, the bell turning ov^er and over and ringing 
without cessation. Fire was the usual cause of alarm, but the bell was rung in the 
same way to call people together to hunt for a lost child, and was recognized as 
the legitimate method of general alarm. It seemed to say, " Something is the 
matter! come at once! " 

The surplus vitality of the youngsters in a country town frequently found vent 
in playing some mischief with the bell. One young man fastened a piece of twine 
to the tongue of the bell, and took the other end in at the window of his room, not 
far off. In the night there came a slow, muffled, spiritual toll. The supernatural 
was more in fashion then than now, and a certain feeling of awe seized the listen- 
ers. The young man's room was visited. He sat up in his bed and wondered with 
the rest, or rather, more than the rest. Subsequent investigation or confession— I 
forget which — showed that his end of the string was fastened to his great toe; and 
the spirits were laid. Somewhere — it may not have been here — a similar tolling 
was found to have been caused by a string fastened to the horns of a ram tethered in 
the upper part of the church and supplied with hay. In reaching for the hay he 
pulled the cord which tolled the bell. On the night before New Year's or Christ- 
mas day, the boys would sometimes get into the church and set the bell a ringing 
with an alarm peal. What happened to one of them was told in rhyme some fifty 
years ago, and is repeated in Volume II, page 936. 

Before the days of steam most of the factories in town had bells. 
These have been superseded by steam whistles. The startling 
effect produced by these upon the auditory nerves was the theme 
of a piece of verse published in the American in March, 1864, entitled 
''The Stranger in Town," and " respectfully dedicated to Brown's 
gong." Says the poet: 

As through this great city I wandered around, 
Astonished was I at a horrible sound. 

He is told by a passer-by that it is a steam whistle, and concludes 
that it is without parallel in all his previous experience: 

In my far western home I often have heard 
The yell of the panther, the scream of the bird; 
But of noises unearthly — strange though it seem — 
I've never heard aught like the whistle of steam. 

It Strikingly illustrates " how use doth breed a habit in a man/' that 
in 1895 the sound of the steam whistle is quite unobserved, unless 
it is soiinding an alarm of fire or is carried shrieking through the 
city at midnight on the top of a locomotive. 



CHAPTER XLIII. 

INDIAN AND ENGLISH PLACE NAMES FROM " ABRAGADO " TO " WORLD's 

END " THE MEADOWS LARGELY NAMED FROM THE PLANTERS 

THE MOUNTAINS, HILLS AND STREAMS FROM THE PLANTERS OR 
THEIR SONS EXCEPTIONS. 

THE men of Farmington had permission from the Colonial 
government to improve the lands at Mattatuck, before the 
associated planters of 1674 came here. This improvement 
period was, with little doubt, preceded by the occasional occupancy 
of desirable meadows for the cultivation of English grasses and 
grains, hops, and other commodities — under the fostering care and 
protective power of the General Court. 

It is, therefore, not surprising that we should find the few 
remaining Indian place names of the township accompanied by 
certain English place names, which we refer to the pre-historic 
days of the region, because we have not been able to associate 
them with any names known of record. Of the number, Mount 
Taylor is the most prominent. Like Mount Tom in Litchfield, it 
occupies a conspicuous position in the midst of the surrounding 
country. While not so much higher than other hills as to give any 
more commanding or extensive views, it yet stands out in relief 
when viewed from other eminences for the reason that it fills the 
space between the valleys of the Naugatuck river and Hancock 
brook, at or near their confluence. 

It was quite natural, therefore, that it should have been used as 
one of the points of demarkation in the Indian deeds of Waterbury, 
and we can readily believe that Mr. Taylor made use of it as a land- 
mark when viewing the region, or exploring the wilderness. He 
evidently had regard for elevated and rugged prominences, as the 
name of Taylor's Meditation was given to the rough, high hill or 
range east of the east branch of Hancock brook. Of Mr. Taylor we 
have no further knowledge. Of Butler we know only that he 
lived and had a house in present Naugatuck before the planters 
of Mattatuck took formal possession of that region. John Macy 
and Golden and the Buck who probably gave name to Buck's 
Hill may have been and probably were improvers of lands before 
1674, while a Wooster, undoubtedly, gathered harvests from the 
swamp lying east of Watertown, before the forty acres were laid 
out to the planters of Mattatuck. Notwithstanding these place 



686 



HISTORY OF WATKRBURY. 



names, we find in our early records no additional evidence that 
a Btitler, Taylor, Macy, Golden, Buck, or even a vSteele lived in 
Waterbury during- its first forty years. 

The need of local names was imperative. For a time Indian 
names were probably accepted, but gradually these were dropped 
from the speech of the people, and English names were substituted. 

The various allotments of land gave opportunity for designating 
a given locality by its owner's name, and at a very early date we 
learn to follow the line of meadow lands for eighteen miles — from 
Welton's meadow at Thomaston to Ben Jones's meadow (lying be- 
tween Grove cemetery at Naugatuck and the river). 

The division of the township into four quarters — by the Nauga- 
tuck river, and the Farmington and Woodbury roads — assisted in 
designating lands ; and the mountain lots and hill lands soon 
became known by the respective names of their owners. 

The modern names are not included in the following list. 



ABRAGADO— The rocky eminence, 
occupying nearly all the area lying within 
the great curve described by the Mad 
river just before its union with the Nauga- 
tuck river, was known to the first inhab- 
itants as Abragado. The region is now 
encompassed by Dublin, River, Bridge, 
and Washington streets. In process of 
time the name has undergone various 
changes — from Abragado to Abragadow, 
to Abrigador. The origin of the name is 
of special interest. Seep. 5J. 

It is first mentioned in existing records 
in 1699, at which date the following 
grant was transcribed from a record 
then so old, or worn, that its date was 
gone, showing that the name, proba- 
bly, was here before the plantation 
was: " There was granted to John Ricli- 
ason, William Hikcox and John Gay- 
lord, thirty acres of land att ye east 
end of abragado provided they im- 
prove it and inhabit four yeirs after im- 
provement and build according to origi- 
nall articles not pregedising highways 
former grants nor drifts of cattell." 

It was upon the "Abragado " that the 
land lay, which was the subject of the 
following unique deed of 1803 (see Vol. 
II, p. 794). It may be found in Vol. 
XXVIII, p. 429, of the Land Records. 



" Know all men by these presents, 
that I, John Nichols of Waterbury in 
New Haven County, taking into con- 
sideration that all mankind sent into 
this Terrestrial world were by nature 
entitled to the equal enjoyment of Water, 
Earth, and Air, until those pestilent 
words mine and i/ime were introduced 
by Cain and Abel in jDersonal property, 
and adopted by Abrani and Lot, which 
produced an actual division of their real 
estate by the removal of one over Jordan 
into the plains, whilst the other remained 
in the hill country, whei-eby Jordan be- 
came a line betwixt them, from which 
period the tenure of lands has generally 
been regulated agreeable to the several 
constitutions holding jurisdiction there- 
of, and by virtue of which, under 
Providence, I possess in fee simjsle a 
small landed estate, while my indigent 
Neighbor hath not a place to lay his 
head. Conscious of these facts, and from 
motives of benevolence, duty and charity, 
I do hereby give, grant, bargain and con- 
vey unto Stephen Judd, my neighbor, as 
aforesaid, and unto Sarah, his wife, the 
following messuage or tenement of land 
lying in Waterbury aforesaid, at a place 
called Abrigador in the first society, be- 
ginning at a heap of stones, my corner 



ENGLISH PLAGE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



687 



joining the highway that leads to Colum- 
bia (Dublin street), and runs southwest 
ten rods, then northwest six rods, then 
southeast to the first corner, twelve and 
a half rods, butted east and north on 
highway, west on my own land, and 
south on the heirs of Jonathan Baldwin, 
deceased, or common land, to be by them 
quietly and peaceably enjoyed during 
their natural lives and then to descend 
in fee tail to Elizabeth Judd, the eldest 
daughter to said Stephen and Sarah, if 
she shall choose to occupy and improve 
the same, if not to such of her brothers 
and sisters as she, the said Elizabeth, 
shall choose to resign the same unto, or 
to her, the said Elizabeth's heirs; and I 
the said grantor, do hereby convey the 
above described premises with this posi- 
tive and express condition only, that they, 
the said Grantees, shall not sell either the 
property or use thereof, nor shall the same 
be liable for any debt due or demand of 
the said Grantees or the use thereof; but 
the same is given for the sole use and 
purpose before mentioned, and that only 
(viz.) for a building spot and garden to 
render said Grantees comfortable through 
Hfe, and if the said Elizabeth shall not 
survive the said Stephen and Sarah, then 
to descend to their next eldest surviving 
daughter and to her heirs." 

The land deeded lies on the south 
side of Bridge street and west side of 
Dublin street. It is now or was recently 
owned by George Barns. 

ARNOLD'S HILL— From Nathaniel 
Arnold. Beyond the Boughton place on 
the Middlebury road — the hill to the 
left. 

ASH SWAMP— Now covered by the 
waters of the Chestnut Hill reservoir. 
£Patucko's ring of pre-historic days was 
probably a circular fort in the swamp at 
that point, but it became a very elastic 
ring, stretching northward nearly to 
Spindle hill, and eastward to the Mad 
river.] 

ASH SWAMP BROOK— Now Chest- 
nut Hill brook. 



BAD SWAAIP— It is thought to be the 
small, deep swamp on Fort Swamp brook, 
west of Tame Buck hill, and east of the 
old Finch place. 

BALD HILL— In Wolcott. West of 
the Fair grounds. 

BARTLETT'S SWAMP— Originally 
laid out to George Scott, Jr. In the 
southwest corner of Ash Swamp basin. 

BEAKER HILL— A prominent hill 
west of the Mad river, and above Pa- 
tucko's ring and Spindle hill. Sometimes 
"Becor" hill. It extends from Misery 
brook to the Cambridge road. 

BEAR HILL— In Plymouth. 

BEACON HILL BROOK — See p. 

205. 

BEACON HILL— The hill on the 
east side, at the straits of the Nauga- 
tuck river, and along which the brook 
of the same name runs. Mentioned in 
1673. 

THE BEARD COUNTRY — From 
Nathan Beard, '-Plough Right,'' who 
came in 1737 from Stratford, and in 1740 
had built a house and grist mill between 
the Naugatuck River and the New 
England railroad, and on the north side of 
David's brook. He owned over seventy 
acres between the common fence and the 
east side of the river. It lay against 
Steele's meadow, and its north end was 
substantially at a point where the fence 
approached the river at the western foot 
of Drum hill; its southern limit was ap- 
proximately the southern limit of the 
present Highland park. Nathan Beard 
sold to the third John Scovill everything 
he owned there but his house and mill 
land. Ezra Bronson and Asa Leavenworth 
bought rights of the Scovill heirs, includ- 
ing forty acres on which they built a 
mill, calling it " Beard's old mill place." 
Later owners were Caleb Merrills, Seba 
Bronson, Azor Bronson, Philip Tomp- 
kins. The Naugatuck railroad so nearly 
obliterated the site of the old mill, that 
it is now impossible to identify its exact 
location. 



688 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



BEAVER MEADOW, THE BEA- 
VER MEADOWS, COVE MEADOW 
— The ancient boundaries were Burying 
Yard hill, a line of coves that separated it 
from Manhan neck on the northwest, Hop 
Meadow hill, Great brook and the river. 
The modern limits may be desbribed 
as Meadow street, the tail race of the 
Waterbury Brass company, the river and 
the remaining- sections of Hop Meadow 
hill, together with Great brook. Along the 
land of the Brass company and the present 
junction of the New England and Nauga- 
tuck railways lay Long cove. It was 
about a quarter of a mile in length. Mid- 
dle cove lay next, and Mud cove was near 
the western terminus of Hop Meadow 
hill. A fourth cove, perhaps sixteen rods 
long, lay in the meadow a little westerly 
of Field street. Through Long, i\Iid- 
dle and ]\Iud coves coursed the same 
stream which crossed West Main street 
a little west of the Green. From ]\Iud 
cove to the river, the stream was known 
as Tophet or Tophet brook. Middle cove 
was of slight depth and in 1849 it had 
disappeared. It was customary in the 
early years of the century to draw loads 
of hay through it. 

Sixty years ago the coves afforded ex- 
cellent fishing ground; pickerel, roach 
and bullheads being abundant. Samuel 
H. Prichard informed me that he had 
caught many wild duck and mink in and 
about the coves, whose waters have now 
disappeared. 

BEAVER POND BROOK— The large 
tributary of the Mad river which comes 
into it from the east at the point where 
the East Mountain road crosses the ]\Ieri- 
den railroad. 

BEAVER DAM BROOK— The same 
as Beaver Pond brook. 

BEAVER POND HILL — The hill 
at East Farms, north of the Beaver 
pond. 

BEDLAM BRO(^K— Either what is 
now Long Meadow brook, or a brook 
running into the same at the present 
"Widow Bradley place." 



BEDLAM HILL— The hill on which 
Middlebury centre is. The name is now 
applied to that portion of the hill south 
of the centre, which is 120 feet higher. 
On it Amos and Abel Scott had lands. 
Aaron, John and Gamaliel Fenn's farms 
lay there. On its eastern side is "Ben 
Fenn's pool," a boiling spring that never 
changes its temperature and thaws the 
ice that forms around it. In 1784 there 
was a school-house on the hill. 

BEDLAM MEADOW— Later called 
Long meadow; now partly covered by 
Long Meadow pond. In 1771 Daniel 
Hawkins's house was on the west side of 
it. 

BEN'S MEADOW— From Benjamin 
Judd, in 167Q, who was quite prominent 
in public affairs while he remained here. 
On Steele's brook, above Steele's meadow, 
and Isaac's meadow. It was originally 
the meadow northwest of the " poor 
house," where a race course now is. 

UPPER BEN'S MEADOW — The 
next bit of natural meadow above Ben's 
meadow, near Slade's mill and near the 
mouth of Turkey brook. In 1797 this 
meadow is described as being " near 
Benjamin Richards' new dwelling- 
house," and, as " 8}^ acres more or less " 
— at which date it was sold by " Bela and 
Olive Blakeslee, Hezekiah Brown, James 
Warner, Jr., and Joanna, of Plj-mouth, 
and Preserved and Rachel Hickcox of 
Sangersfield, Otsego Co., N. Y , to Seba 
Bronson and Benjamin Prichard." 

BEN'S MEADOW HILL— The ridge 
of hill land lying westward of Ben's 
meadow. 

BEN'S MEADOW GATE — Where 
the Wooster or Watertown road passed 
through the common fence. 

BENSON'S HILL — The hill where 
Wolcott centre now is. Named for Jacob 
Benson, who was the first known resident 
on that hill, if noL Avithin the present 
bounds of Wolcott. 

BENSON'S POT— A remarkable pot 
or well in the Mad river at the Mad River 



ENGLISH PLACE NA3IE8 OF MATTATUCK. 



689 



falls, where Prichard's mills now are. 
Benson and Benjamin Harrison had a 
mill at the place. 

BIG MEADOW POND— Covers what 
was Southmayd's meadow in the north- 
west part of present Water town, and 
was described when laid out as "on a 
Sprain of Woodbury river." The road 
running up to the eastward of it is the 
Litchfield turnpike from New Haven, 
of 1797- 

BIRCH HILL— In Middlebury. It is 
now Camp's hill, or at least contiguous to 
it. It lies southerly from Hop swamp. 

BIRCH PASTURE— On Willow street, 
north of Ridgewood. 

BIRCH PASTURE— By Mad meadow. 

BISCOE'S HILL— The southern end 
of Bedlam hill. Jeremiah Peck laid out 
120 acres on it in 1721. Samuel Biscoe 
from Milford lived there, and Nathan 
also, it is thought. 

BISSELL HILL— The hill northeast 
of Hop swamp, south of the Bronson's 
meadow- which is at Race plain, and east 
of Three-Mile hill. 

BISSELL'S SWAMP— At the foot of 
Three-Mile hill, southward of it. 

BLOCK HOUSE HILL, BLACK 
HOUSE HILL— "The south end is 
north of the road from Northbury to Cam- 
bridge." 

BREAK NECK, OR THE BREAK 
NECK HILL— In the division of lands 
of 1688 Thomas Warner was to have " two 
acres for one of meadow at the southward 
end of the Break Neck hill as we go to 
Woodbury." Thomas Warner, sold the 
meadow acres to Isaac Bronson about 
twenty years later, who settled there, 
and the name Break Neck was used to 
designate, with an occasional variation 
to "West Farms," present Middlebury, 
until the incorporation of the town. It 
is now used, as at first, to designate the 
high hill between the branches of Hop 
brook in Middlebury. Historians have 
repeatedly assigned the name to a later 
date — telling us that it "was derived 

44 



from the circumstance of one of the cattle 
falling down there and breaking its neck 
while employed in transporting the bag- 
gage of the French troops under the com- 
mand of General Lafayette." 

The French army reached Break Neck 
on the evening of June 27, 17S1. The 
following, from the Diary of a French 
officer, ' ' presumed to be that of Baron 
Cromot du Bourg," recently translated, 
tells that the army reached Farmington 
on June 25th, and encamped about a mile 
and a half from the village. The diary 
commended the Fai-mington encamp- 
ment as one of the most fortunate it had 
occupied. 

The next day, the 26th: " In the morn- 
ing we went to Baron's Tavern; the day's 
march was not fatiguing. The roads 
were very fine." This was over a por- 
tion of our military road, and Baron's 
tavern was Baj-nes's tavern, in South- 
ington. "27th. We left in the morning 
for Breakneck, which we had the great- 
est difficulty in reaching, because of the 
mountains. Our artillery was greatly 
delayed and only arrived at nightfall." 
In a side-note, the writer explains that 
" Bi-eakneck is the English for Casse-cou. 
It well deserves the name from its diffi- 
cult approach. The village is frightful 
and without resources. I noticed some 
mills, in which several planks are sawed 
at the same time." The distance from 
Barnes's tavern to Break Neck is given 
as " a march of 17 miles." 

BRIANT'S HILL — The high ridge 
northwest of West Side hill. Origin of 
name unknown. 

BROOMSTICK LEDGE — On the 
north side of Mount Taylor rock. 

BRONSON'S MEADOW— On the Mad 
river about three miles northeast from 
the centre of Waterbury, and east of the 
road to Wolcott. This meadow is of spe- 
cial interest, because it was a very early 
landmark, dating back to 1688. Land 
was assigned there to John Bronson (the 
planter) who died in 1696. The earhest 
mentioned path over Long hill was " the 



690 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



path to Bronson's meadow." Here it was 
that Timothy Hopkins (son of John the 
miller) had land in 171 5, and he had a 
house there in 17 18. 

The ruin of a house still stands on 
the west side of the Wolcott road, 
at the junction of that road with a 
highway that goes around the north 
end of Long hill. The stone chim- 
ney, freed from the house frame, is a 
picturesque monument to the memory of 
a home. In it are four fire-places, each 
one of which occupied diagonally a corner 
of a room, while the chimney itself is 
twisted to the square of the ridge of the 
house. The brick ovens are deep-set 
within the large fire-places, and two 
cranes still hang in place. Ebenezer 
Warner built the house and lived in 
it from about 1747 until his death at 
the age of ninety-four years in 1805. 
In the same house was born Ebenezer's 
son Justus, by whom, it is said, the 
red house standing across the high- 
way was built. Justus removed after 
the death of his father to Ohio— 
where, after having lived fifty years in 
Connecticut and fifty years in Ohio, he 
died in 1856. Reuben and Elijah Frisbie 
also lived at Bronson's meadow. Elijah's 
house was gone in 1801, a stone in the 
bound line between Waterbury and Wol- 
cott, at that date, being " set where the 
centre of the house was." 

BRONSON'S MEADOW— The large, 
fair meadow-tract between Three-Mile 
and Two-and-a-Half-Mile hills in Middle- 
bury, named from Isaac Bronson, the 
planter, in 168S. His son Ebenezer set- 
tled there until he exchanged with Wil- 
liam, son of Deacon Judd, and came to 
live on the Deacon's corner (southwest 
corner of West Main and Willow streets). 
William Judd did not stay long, if he ever 
lived at the meadow, and, eventually, 
Ebenezer Richardson became the settler 
there. It is on the old Woodbury road 
east of Three-Mile hill. Nathaniel Rich- 
ardson, Ebenezer's son, built a house on 
the opposite side of the road, which is 
still standing. 



BRONSON'S BOGGY MEADOW— 
From John Bronson, in 1688. Its loca- 
tion is not satisfactorily determined. It 
is, perhaps, the swampy tract between 
the branches of Hop brook, northwest of 
Break Neck hill. 

YOUNG BRONSON'S BOGGY 
MEADOW — The low meadow land 
northeast of Chestnut hill on Ash swamp 
brook, above the Wolcott road. 

BUCK'S HILL— This is one of the 
hills whose name has remained un- 
changed from the beginning of the town- 
ship. It either belongs to the period be- 
fore the planters came, or it may have re- 
ceived its name from some member of 
the Buck family. Abraham Andrews 
(the cooper) had a brother-in-law whose 
name was Buck, and the Buck family of 
Wethersfield was closely connected with 
others of the first settlers here. Tradition 
conveniently accounts for the name by 
the supposition that it was named from a 
buck, which leaped from a certain rock 
on that hill. 

The earliest grant of land on Buck's 
hill was made in 1699 to Ephraim War- 
ner and John Welton— " twenty acres at 
the east end "—but no Welton appears to 
have lived upon the hill until 1709. 

Israel Richardson was the first person 
who had land recorded on Buck's hill. 
On April 18, 1701, John and Ephraim 
Warner, father and son, were granted 
land adjoining each other on the north 
side of the hill, which they divided by a 
highway, and also bounded south by a 
highway. On these lots they at once 
proceeded to erect houses opposite to 
each other and near a famous spring, 
called Israel's spring— the father appar- 
ently designing the house he was build- 
ing for his son John. John and his son 
Ephraim had formerly lived neighbors 
to each other— the father, at the north- 
east corner of West Main and Willow 
streets— the son, at the corner of Grove, 
Willow and Pine— while John had prob- 
ably lived with his father. At about this 
time the elder John Warner removed to 
Farmington. Soon after, or about the 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



691 



same time, the two youthful Gaylords, 
Joseph and John (who already were land 
owners on the hill), concluded to build at 
the same place, and obtained the south 
end of the lot on the west side of the 
highway, where each built a house. The 
Warner houses were probably built in the 
season of 1701 — the Gaylord houses in 
1702. Ephraim Warner sold to his cousin 
Benjamin Warner in 1703, and removed to 
Woodbury. It will be remembered how 
rejoiced the people were to get him home 
again (as Dr. Ephraim Warner) after the 
sorrowful days of 171 3. He then lived 
on the Irving block corner, but later in 
life returned to Buck's hill. It is thought 
that he then lived on the east side of the 
highway, not far from the "Buck's leap," 
and, in the same house where Roger 
Prichard lived in 1760, and Elias Clark at 
a later day. The house is now occupied 
by Feodore Liebricht. Dr. Ephraim War- 
ner's sons, John, Obadiah and Ephraim, 
all settled on Buck's hill. Joseph Gay- 
lord sold his house in 1709 to Richard 
Welton. Richard had been down at 
Durham, working for Joseph, and took 
the house in payment for his labor. He 
lived on the hill forty- seven years, and 
his descendants lived and prospered there 
long after his decease. 

BUCK'S MEADOW, BUCK MEAD- 
OW — Mentioned in 1679. On the river 
above Mount Tajdor. Frost's bridge is 
against it. 

BUCK'S MEADOW MOUNTAIN— 
The elevation lying along the meadows 
and extending northwestward to Deep 
River brook. The more elevated portion 
of Buck's Meadow mountain, west of the 
source of Turkey brook, is the fine, mas- 
sive wealth of highland that frames 
Watertown on the northeast, the Scott's 
mountain (910 feet at its highest point) 
of ancient Waterbury. Buck's Meadow 
mountain extends southward to Ed- 
mund's (Scott's) old mountain. 

BULLHEAD POND— The small pond 
north of Waterville village, and near the 
factory of the American Pin company. 



BULL HEAD PONDS— The four 
small round ponds, two on each side of 
West Main street, near the Waterbury 
B rass company's canal. 

BULL PLAIN— The plain near Bull- 
head pond, formerly Hancox plain. 
Named from Deacon Samuel Bull of 
Woodbury, who early owned it. 

BULL PLAIN ROCKS— The lower 
point of the Mount Taylor range, near 
Ball plain. 

BUNKER HILL— A school district. 
The name was assigned before iSoo and 
was undoubtedly given in honor of the 
locality of that name in Massachusetts. 
Formerly "Tompkins' district." 

BUNKER HILL ROAD— Before 1720 
it was known as the " Upj^er Road to 
Woodbury." Later, after Joseph Nich- 
ols settled near where John Atwood lives, 
it was called "the Road to Nichols' farm 
and Woodbury bounds." 

BURNT HILL— Mentioned in 1680. 
It rises to an elevation of 660 feet di- 
rectly north of the city, whose streets 
are rapidly extending upon it. It was 
probably burned over at a very early 
date. 

BURYING YARD HILL— The Grand 
Street hill, on which was the first bury- 
ing yard of the township. 

BUTCHER'S ISLAND — A small 
island at the junction of Steele's brook 
with the river. 

BUTCHER'S ISLAND— The island 
at the mouth of the West Branch, be- 
tween it and the river. The butcher was 
Thomas Hancock or Hancox. 

BUTLER'S HOUSE BROOK — In 

Naugatuck. 

CANE MEADOW — Mentiimed in 
17S1. At the head of Cane Meadow 
brook, which empties into Wigwam 
Swamp brook from the north, east of 
Waterville. 

CANE MEADOW PLAIN — Men- 
tioned in 1728. The fair hill-top where 
Zebulon Scott settled, on the road from 
Waterville to Buck's hill. 



6g'. 



HISIOBT OF WATERBUBT. 



CANOE PLACE— There were doubt- 
less Canoe places wherever it was con- 
venient for the owners of canoes to use 
them. One is mentioned on the Mad 
river, another apparently at Union City. 
The name is now applied to a spot at the 
bend of the river below Naugatuck. 

CANNON BRIDGE— The bridge over 
Mad river, at Dublin street. Mr. James 
Porter says he was told by some of his 
people that after the war of the Revolu- 
tion an old cannon was set up in the 
ground near the bridge, and that the 
bridge got its name from that circum- 
stance. 

CARRINGTON'S BROOK — From 
John Carrington, an original settler. 
The tributary of the Mad river, rising on 
the east side of Long hill and entering 
Mad river through the raceway of the 
East brass mill. 

CARRINGTON'S PONDS— The pair 
of small, round ponds between the old 
Cheshire road (now so-called) and the 
Plank road, east of Carrington's brook. 
Named from John Carrington. 

CARRINGTON'S SWAMP — The 
swampy tract on Carrington's brook 
south of the old Cheshire road and 
mostly, if not wholly, north of the Plank 
road. 

CATTAIL MEADOW— Mentioned in 
1740. North of Eliakim Welton's house. 

CEDAR SWAMP— At the head of a 
branch of Hop brook, east of Lake 
Quassapaug. Mentioned in an Indian 
deed of 16S4. 

CEDAR SWAMP— In the " northeast 
corner of the bounds near the Great Rock 
house." 

CHESTNUT HILL— The hill north- 
east of Long hill that is S60 feet in 
height. The Rev. Jeremiah Peck had 
land on it. There is a remarkable little 
pond on the summit of the hill. City 
Mills pond lies at its southwestern side 
and the Chestnut Hill reservoir north- 
west of and between it and Patucko's 
Ring. 



CHESTNUT HILL MEADOW— Now 
covered by City Mills pond. One arm of 
the pond is over Joseph Lewis's meadow. 
The second Samuel Hikcox had land in 
it, and a grant of land for a yard near by. 

CLARK'S SWAMP— Near the mouth 
of Carrington's brook, named from Clark, 
the son of John Carrington, the planter, 
or from Deacon Thomas Clark, who 
owned land there. 

THE CLAY PITS— North side of, 
and at Grove street. Land extending from 
the Buck's Hill road westerly to a five- 
acre tract belonging to Samuel Hikcox, 
which separated it from Cooke street, 
is described as " at the Clay Pitts." On 
the south side of Grove street at the same 
point, the second Joseph Hikcox had 
land; he was " not to hinder men coming 
to the Clay Pitts." 

CLINTON HILL, OTHERWISE 
NEW CANAAN— Near and west of 
Spindle hill. It is q6o feet high and on a 
clear day Long Island Sound may be 
seen from it. It was perhaps named 
from Samuel Clinton, who lived there in 

1795- 

COMMON FIELD— The enclosed land 
of the proprietors, in which each held 
lands according to the number of pounds 
propriety which he had, the highest 
^100, the lowest ^50; although a man 
might augment his lands by buying his 
neighbor's rights in the field. 

COMMON FENCE — The fence en- 
closing the above lands, which fence was 
made by each proprietor in proportion to 
the number of acres he owned within the 
field. 

COMMON LAND— The unappropri- 
ated land of the township, held by the • 
proprietors in fee, but devoted to no 
special purpose. 

COMMONS— The sequestered or re- 
served sections of the township, devoted \ 
to special and particular uses, in which 
every man had a common right to get 
wood, timber and stone. In the seques- 
tered land were the common pasture, the 
pasture for horses and the reservation 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



693 



where young cattle were kept during the 
summer, and where the bog-hay was 
stacked, this being then the staple winter 
food for growing stock. And at a later 
date the Green and the highways were 
used, under certain conditions, for pas- 
turing cows, and the cows so pastured 
were known as Common cows. This was 
under Borough rule. 

COOPER'S CORNER— From Abra- 
ham Andrews. It is that portion of his 
meadow allotment which lay between 
the Naugatuck and Mad rivers at their 
junction. 

COOPER'S POND— A small collection 
of water, near the pi-esent junction of 
East Main and Orange streets— fed by 
springs. 

THE COOPER LOT— On the east 
side of Cherry street, running from East 
Main to Walnut streets. The Tailor lot 
{from John Warner, the tailor) lay next 
east of the Cooper lot, and Standley's 
Timber adjoined that on the east. 

COTTON WOOL MEADOW— Ed- 
mund Scott owned land there in 1722 as 
one of the "proprietors of the old saw 
mill." The name is supposed to have 
arisen from a plant now growing in the 
swamp. Daniel and Abraham Osborne 
owned lands in it in 1770. It is now in 
Osboimtown and is called Cotton Wool 
swamp. 

CRANBERRY BROOK— Crosses the 
highway to Watertown a little below the 
site of the first meeting-house and the 
old cemetery of that town. Cranberry 
pond and Cranberry meadow are on the 
same brook, south of Richard's moun- 
tain, the site of the first house in Water- 
town, 1701. First mentioned in 1722. 

CROSS BROOK— In Watertown. It 
rises at the north end of Scott's moun- 
tain, near the original Hungerford house 
and flows northwestward into the West 
Branch. Bidwell's saw mill is on it. 

CROW HILL— "About three miles 
southeast of Waterbury meeting-house." 
" Near Tavern brook." Directly north 
of Turkey hill. 



DAVID'S BROOK — Named from 
David Carpenter. There was no other 
David in the town at the time when this 
brook was named on the records, and the 
same land was owned later by Robert 
Porter, David Carpenter's successor. It 
is that small stream or "run of water" 
crossing the upper Waterville road near 
Nuhn's ice house. It rises between Wil- 
low and Cooke streets in the north part 
of Flaggy Swamp plain, and flows be- 
tween the Great hill and Drum hill, and 
enters the river against Steele's meadow. 

DAVID'S BOTTOM— The low land 
at the mouth of David's brook, now occu- 
pied by the pond of the West Brass mill. 

DAVID'S SWAMP— This was west of 
Town Plot, near where Caleb Thompson 
settled. It was granted to David Scott 
on condition that he ' ' should not hinder 
cattle coming to water." Another swamp 
was named from the same David Scott. 
It was in the West Branch region. 

DEAD MEADOW— On the Wolcott 
road, "east of Long hill, and south of 
the ancient Warner site." It was Upson's 
meadow of 1729; later Dead swamp. 
Jeremy's brook runs through it. 

DEACON'S MEADOW— See p. 239. 

DEEP RIVER BROOK— Rises on 
Scott's mountain and empties into the 
Naugatuck opposite Jericho rock, and be- 
tween Deep River rock and Buck's 
Meadow mountain. 

DEER STAKES THE— They are at 
the east end of Mount Taylor rock. It is 
not known whether the natural formation 
of land and rocks furnished the name, or 
whether stakes were erected there to 
turn the deer from their course. It is a 
wild region, well-watered and suitable 
for deer to range in. Mount Taylor rock 
extends east and west nearly across 
Mount Taylor, leaving the place called 
the deer stakes at the eastern base. It is a 
narrow passway, of fifteen or twenty rods, 
from the lower to the upper end of the 
range, and it can readily be seen that 
stakes at this place would serve to turn 
the deer either way. The boulders lying 



694 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



here would'afford excellent hiding places 
for the hunter. Mr. Southmayd had land 
laid out on the range that was culti- 
vated. 

DEVIL'S CART PATH— Mentioned 
in 1763. Near the north end of Turkey hill. 

DOCTOR'S ISLAND— From Doctor 
Porter. Mentioned in 1739. At Hancox 
meadow. 

DOCTOR'S ORCHARD— Mentioned 
in 1740. From the second Dr. Daniel 
Porter. It was just below Newell's eight 
acre lot, below Highland park. It was 
afterward called Annis's Orchard, from 
Annis Scovill, who received it from the 
estate of her father — the third John Sco- 
vill. 

DOCT'OR'S POLES— At the falls of 
Hancox brook. A tract belonging to 
Doctor Porter. Supposed to be hoop 
pole land. It was on the east side of the 
brook. 

DRAGON'S POINT— New Haven and 
other towns had places with the same 
name. It is that rocky point that comes 
to the river (on the west side) at the lower 
end of Long meadow, where the river 
turns abruptly to the west. It was the 
southern limit of the land divisions of 
1674, when every plan was laid for the 
occupancy of Town Plot — and, later, was 
the southern limit of the common fence. 

DRUM HILL— The highest portion of 
Cooke street passes over the crown of 
the hill. It is separated by David's brook 
from Manhan Meadow hill, while north- 
ward it extends to the valley of Wigwam 
Swamp brook, westward to the river. 
Hancox brook enters the river at the 
northwest corner of the hill. 

EAST MOUNTAIN— East of Great 
hill and of the Abrigador and between 
Fulling Mill brook and Mad river. The 
City reservoir and the Distributing res- 
ervoir are upon it. It is Soo feet high 
and extends into Prospect and Nauga- 
tuck. 

EAST FARMS: HOG POUND— 
The section of country that was early 



devoted to the pasturage or keeping of 
live pork, the staple flesh food of our 
forefathers from the days when they 
hunted the wild boar in the wilderness 
forests of Central Europe in mediasval 
times, through the days of their establish- j 
nient as a powerful nation in England, 
and to the period of their becoming a 
new nation in Ainerica. 

The rough hills and swamps toward 
Prospect and Cheshire were used for a 
general feeding ground, while the 
sm.oother hills to the northward were ap- 
propriated to particular enclosures. This 
occupation of the land prevented the 
early settlement of the really excellent 
lands within the region. 

Joseph Beach was conspicuous among 
the pioneers of this neighborhood, and 
his son Joseph became an extensive land 
owner. The Austins, Pierponts and 
Hitchcocks were among the early set- 
tlei's; the names also of Benham, Mix, 
Lewis, ]\Ierriman, ]\Iunson, Stephen Cul- 
ver and Cornelius Johnson, appear at 
Hog Pound or its vicinitj^ 

EDMUND'S MOUNTAIN, ED- 
MUND'S OLD MOUNTAIN — Named 
from the second Edmund Scott, who had 
a grant of land on it. It is the ridge that 
lies between the valley of the Naugatuck 
river and the valley of Steel's brook. The 
locality first known by that name was the 
southeast portion At a later date the 
northwest part of the ridge was known 
as Hopkins mountain. The same ridge 
at a still later date, when in the owner- 
ship of the Prindle family, was called 
Prindle hill. As early as 1726 William 
Hikcox had a farm on its eastern side, 
and in that year gave his son Samuel a 
house and orchard there. The Hikcox 
family remained on the mountain for sev- 
eral generations. Samuel had a grist- 
mill on the river just below Mount Tay- 
lor, and the old road that crossed the river 
at the upper end of Hancock meadow 
ran through the farm. Captain Abraham 
Hikcox was born and "brought up" in 
this neighborhood. 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



695 



On the southeast corner of the same 
ridge John Bronson, son of Isaac, gave 
his son Joseph (the year after Joseph's 
marriage with Anna Sonthmayd) a house 
and farm. The Bronsons spread down 
into the valley of the Naugatuck river 
and became the possessors of a large part 
of Steele's meadow and plain. Notable 
among them was Seba, the son of Joseph, 
who owned a 200-acre farm — on which 
Waterbury's almshouses, both the old 
and the new one, now stand. Seba Bron- 
son's house stood either on the site of the 
first "poor house," or on the opposite 
side of the road that goes over Edmund's 
mountain. At one date, Seba's house 
was described as ' ' near the four corners 
of two roads" — one was from Waterbury 
to Watertown, the other from Bunker hill 
to Waterville. 

Jonathan Prindle, Jr., from whom the 
ridge WHS also named, settled at Oakville 
and spent his life there, while his descend- 
ants ascended the mountain and owned 
it largely. 

EDMUND'S NEW MOUNTAIN — 
The bound lines of Waterbury, Middle- 
bury and Watertown meet on it. It was 
also known as " Ned's New Mountain." 

EDMUND'S PASTURE — On Great 
brook — a landmark in ancient days in the 
layout of highways. Near Farm street. 

ENGLISH GRASS MEADOW— See 
page 244. 

EPHR AIM'S MEADOW — On Great 
brook above City Mills pond. Granted 
about 1705 to Dr. Ephraiin Warner. One 
of the sweets offered to him by the town 
to stay away from Woodbury. It was 
not laid out until his return to Waterbury 
about 1715. 

EPHRAIM'S SWAMP — An earlier 
name for Sol's swamp, in the Park. 

FISHING ROCK— On the north side 
of the West Branch, above Eagle rock. 

FLAGGY SWAMP— The swamp the 
west side of Cooke street. Robert Porter 
in 1687 had land at this swamp. Thomas 



Fitzsimons lives on Flaggy Swamp plain 
" off Pine street." 

FORT HILL — On the east of the 
Naugatuck valley. It is a sandy spur of 
the Mount Taylor range, and a short dis- 
tance south of the Rattle-Snake ledge, 
so-called a century ago. Near by, and 
above it, lived Abraham Hikcox, and, 
later, Daniel Brown, son of James, the 
inn-holder. In the distribution of 
Brown's estate the hill is called the Tray 
orchard — probably from its shape. Quite 
recently the tray-shaped top was iinder 
cultivation. It lies a little above the 
present Waterville cemetery. The Naug- 
atuck railroad runs around its western 
end, the carriage road crossing the west- 
ern point. It seems a natural place from 
which to defend the upper end of the 
valley. 

FORT SWA :\IP — This swamp, 
through which the Meriden road passes 
beyond the house of George Hitchcock, 
is an approximation to the swamp fort of 
the Pequots — being a peninsula encircled 
b)' a deep swamp. A high hill, close by, 
may have afforded a good watch-tower 
to note the signals of the approach of the 
Mohawks, and may have been used for a 
beacon fire to warn the surrounding 
natives. Fort swamp is referred to 
many times in our records by its ancient 
name, and certainly as late as 180 1. It 
has also been called Ford swamp, from 
the Ford family who owned lands in or 
near it. In 1716, in a layout of land to 
Timothy Hopkins, it was described as 
" in great swamp east of the old Saw- 
mill Woods." Hopkins owned, at the 
time of his death, over a hundred acres 
in the swamp. The Hopkins heirs sold 
to the Upsons.* 

FROST'S BRIDGE— Crosses the river 
against Buck's meadow near where Moses 
Bronson lived. Named from the Frosts 
who lived in that vicinity for several gen- 
erations. One old house, now occupied, 
and two in ruins still mark the sites. 



* See page 220. 



696 



BISTORT OF WATERBUIiY. 



I'XTLLING MILL BROOK — Daniel 
Warner's brook, Squantuck brook. At 
Union City. 

GASKINS ROCKS, THE GASKINS 
— The precipitous eastern end of the 
range lying between Pootatuck brook 
and the West Branch, anciently known 
as Pine mountain in the distribution of 
168S. It is now called The Gaskins. The 
cemetery of Thomaston is on the north- 
eastern part of the range. The old hill 
road west of the river is now in use as 
far as the cemetery. It formerly con- 
tinued over the range and on down over 
the ancient Scott's mountain. 

GAYLORD'S BROOK— Rises in the 
swamp east of Long swamp, runs down 
west of Gaylord's and Oronoke hills to 
Hop brook. The portion of it that ran 
through Hikcox meadow received his 
name. At a later date the lower end of 
it was known as Wooster brook, from 
Abraham Wooster, who settled there in 
1752. 

GAYLORD'S HILL.— It was named 
from Joseph Gaylord, the planter. It is 
ou the road to Middlebury. On its south- 
ern end was the Nichols tavern of 1770 
or earlier, until a year ago, when the 
house was burned. It is opposite the 
Peat swamp. See page 354. 

GAYLORD'S MEADOW — See Sco- 
vill's meadow. 

GAYLORD'S PLAIN— The flat land 
at and about where Silver street begins. 
From John Gaylord. Also a school dis- 
trict in the earlier half of the century. 

GEORGE'S HORSE BROOK — A 
small brook that comes into Beaver Pond 
brook just west of Beaver pond. 

GEORGE'S HORSE HILL— It ex- 
tends from George's Horse brook on the 
west, to Hog Pound brook on the east. 
The famous Beach tavern, now a Pier- 
pont place, was at the south end of the 
hill. Named, it is thought, from a horse 
belonging to George Scott, the son of 
Edmund. 



GILES' GARDEN— A piece of grav- 
elly land on the river road to Waterville, 
a little below the Waterbury Brass Com- 
pany's dam— named from Giles Brown, 
who tried to cultivate it. 

GLEBE SWAMP— See " The Park." 
When laid out, it was described as 
" lying in the cattail swamp on the brook 
which runs through Scovill's meadow." 
In 1800, the southeast corner of it was a 
chestmit tree, " dry and blown up by the 
roots." The same chestnut tree bound 
is mentioned in 1726. 

GOLDEN'S MEADOW, GOLDING'S 
MEADOW— That swampy place next 
below the City Mills pond. Origin of 
the name is not known. It is now over- 
flowed. 

GRASSY HILL— Mentioned in 1726. 
It lies between Lewis's or World's End 
hill and Spindle hill. In 1738 it is 
described as being about 100 rods north 
from Benjamin Warner's house. 

GREAT BROOK— Rises east of 
Grassy hill, passes between Long and 
Burnt hills, flows through the city and 
enters the river between Bank and Bene- 
dict streets. 

A branch of Hancox brook is fre- 
quently called Great brook and the name 
is, in certain instances, given to Hancox 
brook itself; also, to the north branch of 
Hop brook. 

GREAT BOGGY MEADOW— On 
Buck's hill. In 1731 John Warner, son 
of Ephraim, had a house west of it. A 
white oak tree stood at the northwest 
corner of his house lot, and a black oak 
at the southwest. 

GREAT BROOK BOGGY MEAD- 
OW — The stone factory of the late 
Henry C. Griggs is ir this meadow, and 
it is also to be the site of the new mill of 
Rogers & Hamilton. 

THE GREAT BOGGY MEADOW, 
WEST OF TOWN PLOT— Tamarack 
swamp. 

GREAT BROOK FLAi:- -St. Paul's 
church stands on it. 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



697 



THE GREAT HOLLOW, GEORGE'S 
HOLLOW— That depression at the head 
of Fulling Mill brook between East 
mountain and Hopkins's hill. From 
George Welton, 1726. 

THE GREAT HILL, EAST OF 
QUASSAPAUG— Referred to by name 
in one of the Indian deeds. It is now 
called " The Great hill." 

GREAT HILL— The extensive eleva- 
tion on the east side of the river extend- 
ing from Fulling Mill brook at Union 
Cit)^ to '' Smug's " brook at Hopeville. 

GREAT HILL— The Great hill north 
of the town extended from the Nauga- 
tuck valley to the valley of Little brook, 
and from David's brook to the lower 
lands near the Town Spot. 

GREAT HILL— West of the village 
of Naugatuck. The top of the hill was, 
later, called Gunn hill from Isaiah Gunn. 
The lower portion is now called the 
Terraces. Gideon Scott was, perhaps, 
the first man who lived on the hill. His 
brother Edmund also lived there. 

GUNNTOWN— The centre of Gunn- 
town was situated in the heart of the 
basin once known as Toantic meadow 
and a little farther up the brook than 
the present village of Millville, while 
the homesteads of Nathaniel Gunn, Sr., 
his son Enos, and his grandson Enos, as 
well as that of Samuel Gunn (also the 
brick store built by him) all stood on the 
present Middlebury side of the line. 

The first land owned by any person 
in that vicinity was six acres granted to 
Timothy Standly in 16S7, described as 
"up Toantic brook." After Timothy 
Standly and his nephew, Thomas Clark, 
agreed to have all things in common and 
dwell lovingly together (no doubt em- 
ployed in weaving cloth for the Water- 
bury people), they deeded this tract of 
land to another cloth-weaver, Joseph 
Lewis, who laid out about eight acres of 
upland in a snug little nook near it, and 
there built a house for his son Joseph, 
deeding his possessions in that vicinity 
to him after the young Joseph was mar- 



ried. Joseph, Jr., like his father, was 
progressive and enterprising, and soon 
added to his houses and lands a hand- 
some slice of meadow, and another house. 
Although the Lewis possessions at Toan- 
tic meadow antedated those of any other 
person in that neighborhood, yet Thomas 
Warner laid out a handsome tract of 
bachelor land by and near the base of 
Lewis's hill. Removing to Wallingford, 
he sold the land to John Andrews, who 
immediately began to enlarge his domain 
and built himself a house there, and 
probably was the first settler in that 
neighborhood. His house was mentioned 
in 1726; the Joseph Lewis house in 1728. 

In 1733 Nathaniel Gunn appeared 
upon the scene and bought the farm and 
house of John Andrews. Joseph Lewis's 
next-farm neighbor, Nathaniel Gunn, was 
a son of Abel, who was one of the most 
extensive land owners and financially 
stable men of Derby, to whom his uncle 
Abel (who was the first town clerk of 
Derby and who died childless) left his 
property. Abel, the town clerk, was the 
son of Jasper, who was a physician in 165S. 

To Nathaniel Gunn, then a young man 
of twent^'-four years, Joseph Lewis sold 
out all his possessions in and about 
Toantic meadow, and removed to Ox- 
ford in 1735. From the date of Nath- 
aniel's settlement in Waterbury to the 
time when his family reached the zenith 
of its glory in the days of his son Joba- 
mah, the progress of the Gunn family is 
both interesting and impressive to fol- 
low. Beginning with a single farm in 
1733, it was augmented with the next 
adjoining in 1735, and from that time 
onward the holdings of the Gunns 
spread as with an irresistible force until 
they had taken possession of the region 
round about so completely that it might 
well be said that " they owned all that 
joined them." The Gunns evidently 
believed in the ancient system of land- 
lord and tenant, leaving no place for 
miller, blacksmith, farmer or laborer that 
was not owned by a Gunn. They had a 
few neighbors like themselves — wealthy. 



698 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



l>owerful and aristocratic after the fashion 
of the locality and time — on whom thej' 
encroached not, except so far as to carve 
out a kingdom for themselves. 

They owned the ground the Gunntown 
church stood on so long as it remained 
and after the building was removed. Pos- 
sessed of a round three hundred acres 
almost at the start, Nathaniel Gunn added 
over a hundred on Bedlam hill, which 
continued in the family for several genera- 
tions. Another hundred on the side of the 
Twelve Mile hill was added a little later, 
while the number of minor acquisitions 
became too numerous to mention. Grad- 
t:ally they gathered-in John Weed's 
farm, the Hawkins farm, and, with the 
acquisition of the Arah Ward lands, the 
Gunns reached to Derby line, having 
previously stepped beyond it and owned 
a farm at Red Oak. Finally, the Great 
hill near Naugatuck centre became Gunn 
hill, and the Isaiah Gunn place became 
an ancestral home of the Gunns, while 
the possessions of Enos Gunn extended 
to the river. 

Jobamah Gunn, it is said, aspiring to 
become the largest land owner in Water- 
bury, carried his tax-list on a certain 
year to the assessors, and, learning that 
another man owned more acres than he 
had returned, went straightway and 
bought in haste the first land he could 
find for sale. Tradition claims that he 
at one time possessed a thousand acres, 
and he is said to have carried on all kinds 
of business possible in his day at this 
place; but at last he wavered and fell 
financially, and the glory of the Gunn 
family from 1730 to about 1800 has be- 
come but a tradition. In the year 1794 
he was assessed on ^277. He returned 
603 acres of land. He ploughed 33 
acres, had 220 of pasture and meadow, 
220 of " bush pasture and first-rate out- 
land," So of second-rate and 50 of third- 
rate. He also owned one of the fifteen 
watches and one of the six brass clocks 
owned in Salem the same year. There 
were also eight wooden clocks in that 
parish the same year. 



HANCOX BROOK, HANCOCK 
BROOK — Enters the river from the 
east below Waterville. From Thomas 
Hancox, or Hancock. 

HANCOX BROOK MEADOWS— 
Between " Mountobe " or Mount Toby 
and Taylor's meditation; first mentioned 
in 16SS as "the place where Timothy 
Standly, Stephen Upson and Samuel 
Scott should have their division up Han- 
cock's brook, they to pitch where they 
would, not exceeding three places, and 
to have two acres for one," because they 
went out of their way to accommodate. 
They all had stackyards there. 

HANCOX ISLANDS— See page 245. 

HIKCOX BOGGY MEADOW— See 
page 347. 

HIKCOX SWAMP— Named from Ser- 
geant Samuel Hikcox. The second Sam- 
uel Hikcox sold it to Deacon Judd. It is 
on the Buck's Hill road about a half mile 
above Griggs street and is that fine, 
level tract of land lying between the road 
and the east side of Burnt hill. Martin 
Shugrue lives on it. 

HIKCOX SWAMP— In Watertown. 
It is now covered by the considerable 
pond lying to the southeastward of the 
village. 

HIKCOX BROOK— First, the stream 
that borders Westwood (the residence of 
]\Ir. Israel Holmes) on the south. It was 
named from vSergeant Samuel Hikcox, 
who very early laid out five acres there. 
His son William laid out much land at 
the same place. Second, in Watertown, 
flowing between Hikcox mountain and 
Hikcox hill. 

HIKCOX MEADOW BROOK— In 
Middlebury. From Samuel Hikcox, who 
owned a boggy meadow along the brook. 
In 1687, in a grant to George Scott, it 
was called the north branch of Hop brook. 
It is the lower end of Gaylord's brook. 
At its mouth it is called Wooster brook, 
from Abraham Wooster, who settled 
where the Bradleyville knife shop is. 

HOG POUND— See page 221. 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



699 



HOG POUND BROOK— Flows into 
Beaver Pond brook at the East Farms 
school-house. 

HOP BROOK— See p. 353. 

HOP MEADOW— See p. 241. 

HOP SWAMP— See p. 353. 

HOPKINS MOUNTAIN— The north- 
ern end and the highest part of Ed- 
mund's mountain. 

HOPKINS HILL— The hill which 
extended from near the ^Nlilford line to 
Fulling Mill brook and on which Stephen 
Hopkins, son of John, the miller, settled 
in 1734. After the death of John, the 
miller, in 1732, his sons, Timothy and 
Stephen, sold the corn-mill here to Jona- 
than Baldwin, and so far as has been 
learned no member of the Hopkins 
family was a miller after that date in 
Watei-bury. In 1734 we find his house 
first mentioned. It has been said that 
he was living there in 1730 when Joseph, 
his son, was born. Hopkins hill is two 
miles easterly from Naugatuck. The 
first house of Stephen stood on the sum- 
mit of the hill a little southeast of the 
present residence of Timothy Gibbud. 
He built immediately (and perhaps be- 
fore his house was built) a saw-mill on 
the small stream that flows southward 
through the ancient farm into Beacon 
Hill brook. The farm itself was some- 
thing more than an ordinary farm. It 
consisted of a solid block of nearly a 
thousand acres, beside out-lands. The 
nucleus of the farm was a 200-acre tract 
that had been Joseph Gaylord's. Gajdord 
sold it to Timothy Hopkins, and this sale 
has perhaps given rise to the erroneous 
statement that Timothy Hopkins lived at 
Judd's Meadows. Timothy sold this to 
his brother Stephen. Other lands about 
the sources of Fulling Mill brook were 
given to Stephen's wife by her father, 
John Peck of Wallingford. 

Southeast from his own house (perhaps 
a quarter of a mile) Mr. Hopkins gave to 
his son Stephen a house on the same 
range, calling it his "good hill." His 
son John was given a considerable farm 



off the northwest corner of the large tract, 
with a house on it. John's house was on 
an east and west road and a little west- 
ward from the north and south road 
through the Hopkins farm (commonly 
known as the Hoj^kins road, and ulti- 
mately as a New Haven road). The house 
has been lately known as the Monroe 
place. On the south side of the same 
east and west road, and east of the Hop- 
kins road, there was a house that was 
given, perhaps, to his grandson Stephen. 
To Joseph he gave a farm in the north- 
east part of the Hopkins tract, near 
George's, or the Great Hollow, which he 
had bought of George Welton. Joseph 
gave the farm to his son Joseph and 
removed to Waterbury. The latter 
house place is on the north and south 
road that ran from the Russell saw-mill 
down to the road by the Indian well. 

On this hill lived the Stephen Hopkins 
who removed there (possibly in 1729, 
at which date he sold his Waterbury 
house) and died in 1767; also his son 
Stephen, who died in 1796, and of whom 
it is said : "He was a grave, thought- 
ful man; in religion he was almost of 
the strictest sect of the Puritans, 
whose excellencies and defects he at 
once exemplified. His habit of close 
and careful observation both upon moral 
and physical subjects, and self -acquired 
wajr of reasoning upon them, made him in 
many respects a wise man. In person he 
was tall and spare, and in health rather 
delicate, and became accustomed to regu- 
late his diet and clothing with much 
care. Yet he lived to seventy-five, and 
then died of accidental small-pox." 

Here also lived the second Stephen's 
son Samuel, of whom it is written : He 
was a farmer. Of all the men I ever 
saw, he was the most truly just, impar- 
tial and disinterested. He was ingenious, 
laborious and persevering; unsparing of 
himself, and sparing of the labor and suf- 
fering of all other creatures, brute and 
human, and most kindly affectioned 
towards all who could think or feel. 
. As moral and metaphysical 



700 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



speculations are those which can be best 
prosecuted in the midst of laborious )ccu- 
pations, so he dwelt much upon them. 
He had found time, however, to read 
nearly all of value that had been written 
on mental philsophy. He understood 
Locke, Hume, and Edwards, could 
repeat " Pope's Essay on Man," and had 
read much of the old English divines. 
His speculations, if reduced to writing, 
would in my opinion have made some 
clear additions to all that has been here- 
tofore written on some heads of meta- 
physical inquiry. I have never heard him 
on these subjects without being struck b\- 
sonie idea that was new to me, and this 
makes me apprehend that some very val- 
uable thoughts have died with him. In 
the practical concerns of life he had quick 
and intuitive perceptions of truth (simi- 
lar to those of his brother Samuel). As 
an instance, the following is given. "At 
Goshen, they were building a steeple to 
the church, the spire of which was fin- 
ished below, and was to be raised by 
machinery and placed on the square part 
of the tower. When raised nearly to its 
place a gin gave way in such a manner 
that the spire swung out of the right di- 
rection and hung leaning over, while its 
great weight and unequal pressure was 
thrown upon some braces, which were 
yielding and breaking gradually. It 
seemed alike fatal to the workmen to fly 
or stay, and consternation seized the 
multitude, while the impending mass 
threatened ruin, and the master builder 
was without resource. There were sev- 
eral men so placed that they could not be 
extricated, and if the mass fell they must 
fall with it. Af this moment of horror, 
Mr. Hopkins saw where he could attach 
a chain so as to secure the works from 
further pressure in the wrong direction 
and probably prevent the fall. He seized 
an ox chain, wound it around his neck and 



shoulders and mounted rapidly to the 
scene of danger, i-egardless of the calls 
of his friends, whose attention was 
engrossed by the awful danger of his 
enterprise. He attached the chain in 
such a manner as to secure the crushing 
braces and all was safe." 

On Hopkins hill also was born "one 
of the most distinguished physicians 
of Connecticut " — Dr. Lemuel Hop- 
kins, brother of Samuel, of whom a 
notice will appear elsewhere, but not 
the following estimate left of him by 
one who knew him well : " His pecu- 
liar faculty was the intuitive and almost 
instantaneous perception of truth. The 
whole cast of his mind, and therefore of 
his conversation, was in the highest 
degree bold, strong, original ; and his 
thoughts were very often uttered in ner- 
vous and concise figures of speech en- 
tirely peculiar to himself and full of 
instruction and light. He was in many 
respects the most extraordinary man I 
ever knew, yet he has left nothing behind 
him which will at all do him justice. He 
will live a little longer in the love and 
admiration of the good and wise of his 
acquaintance who survive him, and then 
the memory will be lost to all human 
view." His portrait,* painted by Trum- 
bull in 1794, is said to "present a head 
and face hardly excelled by the superla- 
tive beauty of Milton." f 

HORSE PASTURE— Of very early 
date. It included lands sequestered for 
the pasture of horses. It is now known 
as Hopeville. 

HUBBARD'S HOLE — The place 
where Nathan Hubbard settled in 1735 
or earlier. On Great brook at the Chest- 
nut Hill road, and on the north side of 
City Mills pond. 

INDIAN FARM: 1731— On the south- 
erly side of East mountain, or in that 
vicinity. 



* This portrait was in 1832 in tlie ownership of Mr. James Watson of New York. 

+ In his personal sketch of Dr. Hopkins, Dr. Bronson describes him as " ugly and uncouth in personal 
appearance," which, it would seem, in view of the above reference, must be a mistake. This impression was 
perhaps obtamed from J. W. Barber's " Connecticut Historical Collections," where he quotes from " Kettell's 
American Poetry." 



ENOLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



701 



INDIAN FIELD, NEW INDIAN 
FIELD— Mentioned in 1731. 

INDIAN WELL— Near tlie highway 
between Naugatuck and Prospect, within 
sight of it, and a little east of the four 
corners formed by the Hopkins road and 
the road by the ancient Ford place in 
Naugatiick. It is a depression in a 
meadow, circular in form, about thirty 
feet in depth, with a ilat bottom, and 
shaped as though formed by art. 

ISAAC'S MEADOW BARS— At the 
intersection of the upper road to Wood- 
bury with the Litchfield road, which fol- 
lowed the west fence of the common 
field to where it crossed the valley of 
Steele's brook. 

ISAAC'S MEADOW — On Steele's 
brook just above its junction with the 
Naugatuck river, It lies "largely" on 
the west side of the brook just north of 
Hancox's eight acre lot. 

ISRAEL'S MEADOW— The first land 
recorded at Buck's hill. It lies near the 
Buck's Hill school-house, and is low 
meadow land, 

ISRAEL'S SPRING — From Israel 
Richardson, who was the first person 
who had land recorded on Buck's hill. 

JEDEDIAH'S BROOK-It rises in 
Jedediah's swamp between Welton's 
mountain and Warner's mountain, and 
flows into Steele's brook at Ben's meadow. 
Named, it is thought, from Jedediah 
Turner. 

JEREMIAH'S B R O O K — A large 
branch of Steele's brook that originally 
flowed from Long Boggy meadow in 
present Watertown. The meadow was 
recently overflowed with water and called 
Wattle's pond. It is now known as ' ' Win- 
nimaug," an Indian name, constructed 
for it by the Rev. Dr. Anderson. Jere- 
miah's hill is the elevation 820 feet high 
lying between the pond and Steele's 
brook. Jeremiah's meadow lies between 
and below the pond and the hill. The 
road running across the hill was de- 
scribed as going through the notch of 
Jeremiah's hill. The brook, meadow and 



hill were named for the Rev. Jeremiah 
Peck, to whom lands were laid out there. 

JEREMIAH'S HILL-See Jeremiah's 
brook. 

JEREMIAH'S MEADOW— See Jere- 
miah's brook. 

JEREMY'S BROOK— It flows south- 
eastwardly between Long and Chestnut 
hills into Dead Meadow or Swamp. 

JEREMY'S SWAMP— Named from 
Deacon Jeremiah Peck in his youth. In 
the vicinity of Dead swamp and where 
the Warners settled on the Wolcott road. 

JUDD'S JERICHO— The plain on the 
east side of the Naugatuck river just 
above or near the junction of the West 
Branch with it and on which the Rey- 
nolds Bridge station stands. 

STANDLY'S JERICHO-On the east 
side of the river south of Judd's Jericho 
and partly opposite Pine meadow. 

JERICHO ROCK-The rocky height 
east of the river at Jericho bridge. 

JERICHO FALLS— The place is now 
occupied as a knife factory. John Sut- 
li£f had a saw-mill there in 1730. 

JOE'S HILL— In Naugatuck. North- 
easterly from Lewis's hill. It was named 
from Joseph Lewis, and was first de- 
scribed as " the hill between Toantic and 
Cotton Wool meadows," and again as 
"the hill between Cotton Wool meadow 
and Nathaniel Gunn's farm." Here Jo- 
bamah Gunn had his deer park about 
1780. 

JOE'S SWAMP— Near Buck's hill. 
Mentioned in 1728. Probably from Jo- 
seph Lewis. 

JUDD'S HILL— About three furlongs 
from Fort swamp. Thomas Upson, who 
married Rachel, a daughter of Deacon 
Thomas Judd, went to live on Judd's 
hill. Shelton Truman Hitchcock lives on 
the south end of the ridge, and on the 
same site. This hill is over the ancient 
Farmington line, but is mentioned here 
as the place to which Deacon Judd proba- 
bly removed during his brief absence 
from Waterbury. 



702 



HISTOKT OF WATERS URT. 



DEACON JUDD'S KILNS: 1716— 
" On Spruce brook, as they go to Wooster 
swamp." These kilns were perhaps for 
drying grain. It is sometimes " Cills," 
but never written "kill." 

JUDD'S MEADOWS — The ancient 
name of the region that is now Nauga- 
tuck. The name probably antedates the 
settlement of Mattatuck, and the Judds 
probably cultivated the meadows there 
during the time that Farmington men 
had the right to improve lands beyond 
their own boundaries. 

KILL PLAIN, GILL PLAIN, KILN 
PL AIN-It is mentioned very early as Kill 
plain — certainly in 1715 — and is the level 
ground lying between Wigwam swaniia 
and Hikcox swamp on the road to Buck's 
hill. It borders Wigwam swamp on the 
southeast and the name suggests a san- 
guinary Indian conflict on the plain be- 
side the swamp. The little settlement, 
sometimes called Pearsallville, now occu- 
pies Kill plain. Obadiah Scott (son of 
George) was living on it in 1724; Joseph 
Judd in 1729. 

LEAD MINE BROOK, THE EAST 
BRANCH— The East Branch of the Nau- 
gatuck river, in distinction from the West 
Branch. It enters the river at English 
Grass meadow between Thomaston and 
Fluteville. 

LEWIS'S HILL — Named from the 
first Joseph Lewis. He loaned the town 
money to contest its boundary line with 
Wallingford and was repaid by receiving 
eighty acres on this hill. His son 
lived for a time at the base of it. It 
is northwest from the highest part of 
Twelve-Mile hill. The railroad passes 
over it at a point 600 feet above the sea. 
Also, that still higher land beyond where 
William Tyler lives on Buck's hill was 
known as Lewis hill. It was early 
named from Joseph Lewis, who owned 
it before he removed to Judd's meadows. 
It gradually lost his name and became 
known as " The World's End." 

LILY BROOK-April 14, 1753, this 
brook was called the East Branch of the 



Mad river, and, in the same year, it was 
given the name of Lily brook. It enters 
from the eastward at a very sharp turn 
of the river, where the river's channel 
looks like a canal. It is near the north 
end of Bald hill. 

LIN D LEY BROOK — Enters Mad 
river from the east at Philip's meadow, 
north of Woodtick. See p. 21 8. 

LITTLE BROOK — Rises west of 
Burnt hill and unites with Great brook 
near the centre of the city. 

LITTLE MOUNT TOBE— East of 
Mount Tobe. 

LOG TOWN — In Prospect between 
East mountain and Hopkins hill, near 
George's hollow, and east of the Indian 
well. 

LONG HILL— East of the city ex- 
tending from Mad river to Jeremy's 
brook. 

THE LONG LAND, THE SLIP 1700 
— The land included in the western curve 
made by the river at Piatt's mills, in 
which lay nearly all of the Plattsville 
School district of 1852. 

LONG MEADOW— See p 240. 

LONG MEADOW FALLS — In the 
Naugatuck, opposite Hopeville. 

LONG MEADOW BROOK— It rises 
in the Quassapaug region, runs through 
Bedlam meadow and unites with Toantic 
brook near the western foot of Twelve- 
Mile hill. 

LONG SWAMP— On the old Straits 
turnpike in the eastern part of Middle- 
bury near the Waterbury line, and just 
below Watertown line. 

LOTHROP HILL— See page 358. 

MAD MEADOW — Below the Mad 
river junction with the Naugatuck. The 
name covered a long line of meadow 
land, through which South Main street 
extends. 

MAD MEADOW HILL— East of Mad 
meadow. 

MALMALICK, MALMANICK— The 
noble elevation southwest of Town Plot 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



703 



on which one of the Warners received a 
grant of land at an early date, caiising 
the name " Warner's Good Hill " to 
appear on our records. It was later 
settled by descendants of Deacon 
Thomas Clark and was possessed by 
them for several generations. Hans 
Rasmussen is now the chief owner of 
the lands on the hill. His brother, Ras- 
mus Scott Rasmussen, also has extensive 
greenhouses on Malmalick. They belong 
to the first family of Danes that came to 
Waterbury, consisting of James Peter 
Rasmussen, his wife and their seven 
children. They came from Copenhagen 
in 1SS4. 

MANHAN MEADOAV — The island 
meadow formed by the river and a line 
of coves formerly extending from Lake 
Hubbard to Hop meadow, and supposed 
to have been the former bed of the river. 

MANHAN NECK, OR MUNHAN- 
NOCK — The southern extremity of Man- 
han meadow where the first gardens 
were. This name is spelled according to 
the fancy of the recorder, " Munhan, 
Minhan, Mahan," and soon became 
simply "the Neck." 

MANHAN NECK HILL— The round 
hill in Manhan meadow, around which 
the first settlers had their gardens, after 
the manner of the settlers of Plymouth 
colony. It lies in the line of Hop Meadow 
hill, divided from it by the stream and 
coves which lay between them. The 
name is supposed to have been Munhan- 
nock hill. 

MANTOE'S HOUSE, MANTOE'S 
HOUSE ROCKS — Northwest of the 
stone house where Charles Terrill lives — 
formerly the Thomas Judd house on 
the east side of Buck's hill. Elijah 
and Philena Richards sold to Abraham 
Prichard six acres between Chestnut hill 
and Mantoe's House rock. In 1801 he 
had a house there, which he sold in 
1803. 

MESHADDOCK MEADOW— In Mid- 
dlebury. East of Bedlam hill, and north 
of Sandy hill. 



MESHATTUCK MEADOW — This 
meadow, between Gunntown and Hop 
swamp, is also called Meshaddock, Shad- 
dock and Shattuck, and perhaps was 
Mequenhattuck. 

MIERY SWAMP— In Middlebury. 

MOSS'S ROAD, 1770— "A former high- 
way called Moss's road." The present 
town line between Middlebury and Naug- 
atuck is a portion of the Moss (some- 
times ]\Iorse) road. The origin of the 
name has not been learned. 

MOOSE HORN BROOK— A branch 
of the West Branch. 

MUDDY GUTTER — Mentioned in 
1705. Simeon Scott lived in 1799 at "a 
place called Muddy Gutter." Zebulon 
and Benjamin Scott owned land near it, 
also Richard, John, and Titus Welton. 

MULBERRY HILL — Southeast of 
Naugatuck. 

NAGAUTUCK— Probably the Indian 
name of the river, but not in general use 
before iSoo. 

NED'S NEW MOUNTAIN, ED- 
MUND'S NEW MOUNTAIN— On the 
Bunker Hill road, west of Warner's moun- 
tain. 

NEW CONNECTICUT— Spindle hill 
and vicinity. In the west part of Wol- 
cott. 

NEWELL H I L L — From Thomas 
Newell, the planter. It is now Spencer 
hill. 

NICHOLS' PARK, THE PARK, 
THE PARK GATE, THE PARK 
FENCE, THE CRANK OF THE 
PARK — Before 1750 persons in the col- 
ony had erected parks or enclosures for 
keeping and jDreserving deer. The Gen- 
eral Court approved of these parks and 
made most stringent and effective laws 
for the preservation of the deer within 
them, and of the fences, gates and bars 
pertaining to them. Seven pounds, be- 
side the price of the deer, Avas the pen- 
alty for coursing, chasing, hunting or 
wounding any buck, doe or fawn kept in 
any park. For throwing down any fence 



704 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



whereby they might escape, the penal tj- 
was thirteen pounds, beside any damage 
tliat might accrue thereby. 

We find mention, in Waterbury, in 
1750, of The Park, also of " The Park 
fence " and "The Park gate" — leaving 
no doubt regarding the fact that at that 
date the region familiarly known as the 
Park was used as a deer park. 

It contained more than three hundred 
acres, and remains to this day a wild, 
rugged region, almost untouched by the 
hand of man. It has had an interesting 
history. Much of it remains in the realm 
of tradition, but numerous facts may be 
gleaned from the records. There was an 
ancient highway laid out through it in 
1716, known as the Stone path. It merits 
its name, and can still be found without 
difficulty. It began at the road west of 
"Westwood" (which in 1729 formed a 
part of the Litchfield road, and before 
that period the course of the Common 
fence) and ran to the Nichols' Farm road, 
now the Bunker Hill road. The Park 
road, surveyed in 1763, runs through a 
section of it. There was also a "way" 
from the Stone path to the point where 
the Park road enters the enclosure near 
Matthew Lilley's house. Here also was 
the Park gate (the early AVoodbury road 
passing twenty rods distant from the 
gate). The Crank of the Park was the 
bend or angle at its more southern point, 
between the Stone path and the east 
fence. Tradition tells of a club house. 
The building stood on the "way" or 
path between the Stone path and the 
Park gate. 

There is a tract oi \-]4. acres within it, 
that has had but two owners— Jonathan 
Scott (who was taken out of town by the 
Indians), and the Episcopal Church. 
Scott laid it out in 1720. He received it 
" for services done for the proprietors." 
In 1745, the year in which he died, 
he conveyed it (calling it woodland) 
to the Professors of the Church of Eng- 
land in Waterbury. It is still one of 
the glebe lands held by St. John's 
chui-ch. Daniel Scott — the son who 



lived with his father— also signed the 
deed. At the layout of the land its north- 
west corner was an oak tree; in 1745 
it was a " rock-oa.]s. tree"; in 1780 or 
a little later it had become a " laro-e 
rock-oak tree"; in 1S42 it was an ''old 
rock-oak tree," and in 1884 the shell of 
the stump of the tree could be seen, out 
of which two saplings of considerable 
size were growing. In 1724 a tract of 
thirty-two acres was laid out to John 
Richardson, the survey of which in- 
cluded the easterly corner of Scott's land. 
This overlapping of ancient surveys has 
full illustration, as found in the Park. 
This layout of 1724 mentions Bryant's 
hill. Who Bryant was, and why his 
name was given to the hill, we have not 
learned. 

James Nichols— the founder and the 
owner of the Park — in 1733, when his 
father, Joseph Nichols, died, was a stu- 
dent at Yale college. Because of his 
studies he resigned the executorship of 
his father's will. He early sold his right 
in his father s farm to John Nettleton. 
In 1742 he made his first purchase within 
the territory which he later owned. In 
1749 he laid out, bought, exchanged, and 
bargained for lands all about that region, 
and became the virtual owner or con- 
troller of all the land in and surrounding 
his futi:re park — so that the string of his 
purchases extended all the way from the 
summit of West Side hill to the extreme 
northern part of Gaylord's hill, including 
some of the Hopkins land — and this, not- 
withstanding the title still held by others 
to lands within the enclosure, probably 
provided for by "bargains" not on re- 
cord. 

It would be interesting to learn why 
James Nichols forsook his deer park. 
We only know that on January 2, 1756, he 
sold to his " brother" EbenezerWakelee, 
all the land in the Park that he then 
owned, and that he was, at that date, 
living in Salisbury. In 1756 he sold also 
to Wakelee " sundry pieces outside of 
the Park fence." The same year Eben- 
ezer Wakelee sold to his brother James 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



705 



Wakelee, for /135. " one half of that 
Land called ye park," and said that it 
was the land he bought of James Nichols. 

Fifty of the above acres (which ran up 
to the top of Welton's mountain) Wakelee 
sold to David Shelton of Ripton. This 
land remained in the Shelton family for 
more than fifty years, and the name ad- 
hered to the locality as late as 1S65. John 
Clark (who removed to New Milford) 
bought most of the Shelton tract about 
1 8 12; he sold fifteen acres of uniform 
width, off the south end, to William K. 
Lampson, who conveyed it to James 
Scovill, who sold it to Edward Scovill. 
When his estate was settled this land 
was " distributed " to James C. Scovill. 
So far as the records reveal, or their 
estates make it to appear, William 
^lorgan and Miles Morris are still the 
owners of five acres of this original lay- 
oi:t of fifty acres. 

The Park field lay in the southeastern 
portion of it. About 1760, George Nich- 
ols began to cultivate the land there, 
giving it that name. The Nichols family 
owned lands in that region and all about 
it, long after James sold out. Tradition 
indicates at a later period perhaps, and 
probably in the time of John Nichols 
(the author of a most remarkable convey- 
ance of land) that a club of Waterbury's 
young men, built a club house in the 
Park and filled the region with the 
echoes of their festivities — but nothing 
more substantial has reached us than the 
possible site of this club house, elsewere 
\ referred to. George Nichols had an hun- 
dred-acre farm, said to be located at Sco- 
vill's meadow. It extended from the old 
Woodbury road northward, probably to 
the southern limit of the Park, and along 
on the outside of the western side of it. 
On it he seems to have built the famous 
tavern, referred to on page 422. 

Solomon Tompkins lived near the 
southwest corner of Welton's mountain 
in the Park. The remains of his two 
houses still appear, one within, one with- 
out the fence. His first dwelling place, 
by tradition a famous Tory rendezvous in 

45 



the Revolutionary war, is indicated by 
the ruins of a chimney fireplace, the 
other, by a cellar. He deeded in 17S3, 
his house and land to his "friend Mary 
Robbins, living at The Clove in New 
York." This mysterous personage came 
to the Park from Satan's Meditation, 
situated near the Miry swamp in Middle- 
bury, and later, it is said moved to 
Northeast, N. Y. Notwithstanding tra- 
dition, Solomon Tompkins was an Amer- 
ican soldier in the war, and a pensioner 
of 181S. Tradition likewise gives us 
" Saul's " swamp (which doubtless should 
be Sol's) and " Saul " as an Indian. 

Lemuel Nichols' tavern a little beyond 
the Park may account for a part of the 
tradition. 

The last land laid out in the Park was, 
it is believed, Timon Miles's, about 18 17. 

The descendants of Elijah Nichols 
(son of Richard, son of Joseph), have 
lived for many years in that vicinity. 
Hannah, who owned an acre of orchard 
in the Park, was his daughter. Wishing 
to go West with her brothers, Elijah, Jr. , 
and Clement, she, it is said, sold it to 
Amasa Roberts for a horse. Roberts, 
sold the orchard to Aaron Benedict for a 
fat sheep. Later, Thomas Lockwood 
bought it of the Benedict estate, and cut 
the trees down. Gideon, brother of 
Hannah, lived a little eastward of the 
Glebe swamp, where he had a house 
near a spring, and a rude building in 
which he wove carpets. 

Reuben Nichols lived very near the 
Park, where the watering place now is. 
He also built a house on its western edge 
— a part of it set into the ledge — and along 
which the Park fence ran. Bethlehem 
pippins grew there A somewhat cele- 
brated apple tree of the above variety 
still stands not far from the house. The 
rail fence, in an angle of which this tree 
stands, it is said was frequently moved, 
so as to include the tree — the owner, on 
either side, contending for its possession. 

Orra Nichols, Gideon's daughter, was. 
perhaps, the last descendant of the 
Nichols family who clung to the Pai'k. 



7o6 



HISTOR Y OF WA TERB UR Y. 



The house at its gate, in which she lived 
until quite recently, was once a saw-mill. 
It was moved there from Sled Hall 
brook, used as a blacksmith shop, by 
Amasa Roberts — and still later, was 
made a dwelling house. Orra bought it 
and lingered there, until, in her old age, 
the town took her and her poor habita- 
tion into its care. And thus departed 
from this region the last representative 
of the proud and prosperous Nichols 
family. 

NONNEWAUG HILL — North of 
Watertown centre, and within the fork 
of Steel's brook and Obadiah's brook. 
The parsonage or ministry land of 150 
acres lay between the south end of the 
hill and Steel's brook. It was within the 
limits of the Village, land having been 
taken upon it before the Village was laid 
out. We find the following description: 
' ' That called Nonnewaug — northwest of 
Jonathan Scott's mill at the falls of Steel's 
brook." A stream and plain of the same 
name are in Watertown. 

OBADIAH'S BROOK— A branch of 
Steele's brook, north of Watertown cen- 
tre, between the road to Robert's mill on 
the West Branch and the Litchfield turn- 
pike. 

OBADIAH'S MEADOW— At the junc- 
tion of Steele's with Obadiah's INIeadow 
brook. 

OLD ETERNITY ROAD- The old 
highway that runs southward from the 
vicinity of the Rock house, see p 259, 
and goes to the top of Buck's Meadow 
mountain. It crossed the mountain 
lengthwise and came toward Waterbury. 
It is so-called in 1773 in a deed given by 
Richard Seymour to his son Joash. 

ORONOKE HILL, 1686— The ridge 
between Gaylord's and Welton's brooks, 
running down to near where they join 
Hop brook. The Woodbury road of 1720 
ran over its north end, and in the survey 
it is called "a plain hill." It was first 
mentioned in a grant to John Welton, then 
called Worenog. Later it appears as 
Orenaug, Oronoke, Orinack, Orinoque. 



It then became reduced to Onuck, now 
called Oronoke. The south end of it was 
later called Blackman's hill. The Derby 
road of 1740 ran over the middle of it. 
William Johnson now lives on the sum- 
mit. His place was formerly the Dudley 
place. 

THE ORDINARY— A rock on the 
ancient Farmington line, which formed 
the northeast corner of the southern sec- 
tion of the Waterbury purchase of the 
Tunxis Indians in 16S4. 

OUSE BASS SWAMP— North of the 
old Cheshire road, near Calvary ceme- 
tery. 

PATAROON HILL— See page 325. 

PEPPERIDGE SWAMP, PEPRAGE 
SWAMP — Judd's meadow near the Great 
hill, west side of the river. 

PIGEON BROOK— A branch of Hop 
brook, not far from its mouth. The out- 
let of Pigeon swamp — an adjunct of Cot- 
ton Wool meadow. Charles Wedge has 
a shop on it. 

PINE HILL-See p 240. 

PINE HOLE— Waterville. 

PINE ISLAND, PINE ISLAND 
FALLS — In the Naugatuck river above 
Piatt's mills, 

PINE ISLAND MEADOW— The 
small meadow west of the river near by 
the falls. 

PINE ISLAND SPRING— A noted 
spring on the east side of the river at the 
same place — sometimes called "The 
widow's spring." Named for the widow 
of Sergeant Samuel Hikcox. 

PINE SWAM P— Between Upson's 
and Richardson's meadows. 

POLAND— In Farmington and Water- 
bury. Grants to soldiers of the Pequot 
war were made there by Farmington It 
probably was named on account of the 
hoop-poles that were found there, as 
Southmayd, in one instance certainly, 
wrote " Pole Land." A path to " Watter- 
bury" is mentioned there in 1696 in the 
Farmington records. The Poland river 
is an easterly branch of the Pequabuck 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF 3IATTATUC'K. 



707 



river. The principal part of the region 
once known as Poland is now in Bristol, 
and the Terryville station of the New 
York and New England road is in the 
midst of it. 

POND HILL— In the eastern part of 
Naugatuck, in the southern part of the 
Fulling Mill brook system, giving the 
name to the Pond Hill school district. 
The hill was so named from a small nat- 
ural pond on it. 

POPPLE MEADOW— Above the falls 
on the Naugatuck river — where Sutliff's 
mill was. 

PATUCKO'S RING — Originally the 
extensive hill east of Ash swamp. It is 
slightly separated from the original Spin- 
dle hill on the northwest by a small brook 
and the depression through which it runs 
into Ash swamp. It extended to the 
Mad river. See page 53. Josiah Rog- 
ers about 1724 laid out over a hundred 
acres in one tract " on Patucko's Ring at 
the Falls of the Mad River"; land was 
laid out " on the hill east of Ash Swamp 
at a place called Patucko's Ring"; land 
that lay on both sides of Ash Swamp, be- 
low the swamp, was said to be " at Ches- 
nut hill and Patucko's Ring" — so that the 
name would seem to apply to all that ex- 
tensive range of hill from Ash Swamp 
brook northward so far as to lie between 
Spindle hill and the Mad river. 

POVERTY STREET, 1773 — The 
western part of the Bunker Hill road in 
Watertown. 

PRINDLE HILL— Edmund's moun- 
tain, also Hopkins' mountain. The same 
name was at one time applied to the an- 
cient Welton's hill between Grove and 
Pine streets. 

PUNDERSON'S HOLE— John Pun- 
derson of New Haven bought in 1731 of 
Jonathan Sqott " three and one-half acres 
west of the river against Mad meadow." 
Punderson's hole was the peculiar de- 
pression in the sand hills in this pur- 



chase, near the point where the ]\Ieriden 
railroad leaves the New England. 

RACE PLAIN— In Middlebury, the 
east side of Three-Mile hill. Mentioned 
at an early date, and referred to Indian 
occupancy, as it is now well known that 
the Indians met for their annual games 
at chosen resorts, racing being with them 
a favorite game. 

RAM PASTURE, RAM PASTURE 
LANE - Grand street. 

RICHARDS' BROOK, ASH SWAMP 
BROOK— From Colonel Street Richards 
who lived in the house nearest the pres- 
ent reservoir. 

RICHARDS'S MOUNTAIN— See p. 
251. 

RICHARDS' SWAMP — North of 
]\Iount Taylor, on a branch of Spruce 
brook. From John Richards. 

ROARING BROOK— North end of 
Lewis's hill. 

ROARING RIVER— The name of 
Mad river in 1679. 

ROLAND'S SWAMP, j7i6-"On a 
plain west of the highway to Buxhill." 

ROCK HOUSE— See p. 259. 

GREAT ROCK HOUSE — Near 
Buck's hill. 

ROUND HILL, 16S8— Within the 
northeastern part of the city. 

ROUND MEADOW— The site of the 
proposed Hop brook reservoir when Hop 
brook was the proposed source of the 
water supply for the city of Waterbury. 

ROUND MEADOW BROOK — A 
name sometimes given for the north 
branch of Hop brook. 

RUCUM HILL— The southern end of 
the northern division of Gaylord's hill. 

SCHOOL DISTRICTS-In 17SS the 
school districtsof Waterbury were; Break 
Neck,* Buck's Hill, East (Hog Pound), 
Farmingbury, First Society, Gunn Town, 
Hop Swamp, " Amasa Scovills," " The 



* The Break Neck district had forty tax-payers on a sum total of ^^1336, of which number thirteen were 
Bronsons, who paid very nearly one-half the taxes of that district. 



7o8 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY 



Southwest and Salem," "Tompkins," 
Town Plot. 

In 1790 two districts had been added 
and the names changed to numbers— the 
Thirteenth district having been formed in 
part from the Buck's Hill district. The 
East district became the Third, and 
Tompkins the Fifth district. 

Among the early school-houses away 
from Waterbury centre that have been 
noticed as of record before 1800 are: One 
in Westbury in 1762; on Three-Mill hill 
in 1784; on Bedlam hill in 17S4; in Tomp- 
kins district in 1794. 

Of the early school teachers in the 
" Judd's Meadow district," the following 
names have been preserved in the records 
of Deacon Samuel Lewis: In 1771 Abi- 
gail AVinters, Esther Cook, Daniel War- 
ner, Olive Upson and Temperance Spen- 
ser. In 1772 Esther Cook. In 1776 [Airs.] 
Ame Constant. 

SANDY HOLLOW— At and about 
the house of the late Dr. Alfred North 
on North Alain street. It is now occu- 
pied by the Waterbury club. 

SATAN'S MEDITATION— Origi- 
nally a portion of the Miry swamp, be- 
tween the branches of Hop brook. AVhen 
Solomon Tompkins bought land there of 
the Howe family the land was described 
as being " at the Miry swamp." When 
Tompkins sold the land about ten years 
later it is described as "Sa. . . s Aledi- 
tation." 

SAW-AIILL HILL— Near Nathaniel 
Gunn's saw-mill. North of the brook and 
west of Alillville. 

SAAV-MILL PLAIN, MILL PLAIN— 
AA' here the earliest saw-mill of AVater- 
bury was. It is now simply Mill Plain. 

SCOTT'S BROOK— A name once 
applied to that portion of Long Meadow 
brook which is below present Millville, 

SCOTT'S GRAVE— About three- 
fourths of a mile southwesterly from Rey- 
nolds Bridge. 

SCOTT'S MOUNTAIN — See page 
325— Named in 1703. 



SCOTT'S SAW-AIILL— On Hancock's 
brook near the present Downs' grove. 

SCOTT'S SUGAR WORKS— About 
1750. In Middlebury, in the " Aleshad- 
dock" or "Aleshatuck" region. From 
John Scott, son of Edmund, 2d, who 
settled there about 1733. 

SCOA^LL'S MEADOW— On the Mid- 
dlebury road beyond the Boughton place. 
See page 354. 

"SCOWERING" GRASS SAVAAIP 
AND BAD SWAAIP — In the region 
drained by Fort Swamp brook after leav- 
ing Fort Swamp, Bad swamp probably 
being the small miry swamp immedi- 
ately west of Tame Buck hill. 

SCRAG FIELD— Northeast of Buck's 
hill. In 1730 Richard Welton had land 
laid out at its north end. 

SECOND MOUNT, 1740— It lay west 
of Samuel Porter's house, the east side 
of East mountain, at Turkey hill. 

SHARP'S MANOUVER— In 1793 
land was sold to John Kingsbury, Esq., 
described as ' ' in the northeast part of 
the sequester a little south of Flaggy 
Swamp plain, adjoining Sharp's Alanou- 
ver, bounded southward on highway or 
said Alanouver." Laid out on Thomas 
Richardson's right. 

SHRUB PLAIN— On the AVest Branch 
above Reynolds bridge. 

SHUM'S ORCHARD — In Poland. 
There was also Shum's Orchard hill. 

SLED HALL— Traditionally, the spot 
where the pioneer planters passed the 
first winter. Sergt. Samuel Hikcox owned 
land "at Sled Hall." described as " west 
of the river, south and west on the 
hill." Seep. 590. 

SLED HALL BROOK— Flows out of 
Tamarack swamp and into the river 
south of the Waterbury hospital. On 
this stream an attempt to build a saw- 
mill was probably made in 1674, in 
order to furnish material for their 
houses on Town Plot. It was the only 
available brook near there and was | 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



709 



readily adapted to the style of mill used 
at that date. 

THE SLIP — See "THE LONG 
LAND." 

SOL'S SWAMP— In the Park, named 
from Solomon Tompkins. 

SPRUCE BROOK— There were three 
Spruce brooks. One enters the Nauga- 
tuck from the east, and flows between 
Mount Taylor and Mount Tobe; another, 
north of Watertown centre, flows from 
the west into Steele's brook; still another 
enters Steele's brook just above the Oak- 
ville station. 

SPRUCE SWAMP— In the northern 
part of Watertown. East of the road 
from Watertown centre to Robert's mill 
on the West Branch. 

STONE BRIDGE— On the old New 
Haven road at the south end of the 
Abrigador. It was over Horse Pasture 
brook. 

STONE HOUSE— At the southern 
foot of Hopkins' hill. 

STONE PITTS— Near Mantoe's 
House rocks. Rights were reserved here 
to get stone by the proprietors. 

STONY PASTURE— On the western 
side of Long hill. 

SMUG'S BROOK— Origin of name 
unknown. Possibly from an Indian. 
The stream that enters the river at 
Hopeville — sometimes written Smug 
Swamp brook. 

SMUG'S SWAMP— Now occupied by 
the reservoir of the Smith & Griggs 
company at Hopeville. 

SOUTHMAYD'S PASTURE — On 
Great brook above Grove street, border- 
ing on Cooke street. 

STEELE'S BROOK— Is first referred 
to as the brook that comes into the river 
at Steele's meadow; later it is called 
Ben's meadow brook, " Woster," brook, 
and for a time the two names Steele 
and Woster contended for the mastery. 
Named from John or Samuel Steele of 
Farmington, and possibly from Edward 
Wooster of Derby. 



THE STONE PATH, 1716— See the 
Park. 

TAILOR'S MEADOW OR JOHN 
WARNER'S MEADOW— John, the son 
of Thomas Warner, in 1717, laid out land 
near where the small tributaries forming 
the head waters of Beaver Pond brook 
unite. Dr. Ephraim Warner laid it out 
for him, but forgot to tell of it, and the 
land became mingled with other layouts, 
but continued for many years to bear his 
name. 

William Austin now owns land which 
includes Tailor's meadow\ The old 
Goodyear house was near it. Austin 
obliterated the cellar-place of the house 
quite recently. The first settler in the 
region of the meadow was Caleb Merri- 
man, son of Eliasaph of Wallingford. 
He was succeeded by Benjamin Benham 
who ' ' carved off some of the farm for 
Lydia Mix." The Rev. John Reed (who 
won Waterbury's heart about 1700) had 
a farm near by, which James Benham 
bought. Reuben, Shadrach, and perhaps 
Ebenezer Benham, all lived in that 
vicinity between 1750 and 1800. 

THE TAYLOR LOT— The Cooper 
lot (seven acres) lay at the northeast cor- 
ner of East Main and Cherry streets and 
extended to Walnut street. The Taylor 
lot (five acres) adjoined it on the east 
and extended from East Main to Walnut 
street. "Stanley's Timber" adjoined 
the Taylor lot on the east. It was a 
seven acre tract and was botinded west 
by Niagara street. Niagara street was 
an ancient highway (mentioned in 1691). 
Walnut street probably began where it 
now does, and "ran catering up the hill 
to Niagara street." 

TAMARACK SWAMP— It was called 
by this name about 1754 when Mr. South- 
mayd and others combined to drain the 
swamp and make improved meadow of 
it. This was perhaps the last real estate 
transaction in which he was engaged, 
and he seems to have accomplished his 
purpose, as he and the other owners 
sold to one of their number a portion of 



7IO 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



the swamp in severalty, bounded on a 
ditch. Sixty years ago the region was a 
dense swamp. It is now cleared. The 
Middlebury road now runs through it, 
and also Sunnyside avenue. It was first 
called " the great boggy meadow west of 
Town Plot." At a later date both Rich- 
ardson's and Upson's Meadows lay in it. 

TAYLOR'S MEDITATION— The 
rough, high hill lying east of the east 
branch of Hancock brook, around which 
the New York and New England rail- 
road curves, before reaching Tolles's 
station. 

TAME BUCK HILL— The high, 
extensive and prominent ridge between 
Lily brook and Fort Swamp brook. 

TAVERN BROOK— Now called East 
Mountain brook. A branch of Beaver 
Pond brook. The distributing reservoir 
of the first city water works is built in 
the valley of it. 

MOUNT TAYLOR— The rocky, 
prominent ridge above Waterville and 
between Naugatuck river and Hancox 
brook. 

It was quite natural, therefore, that it 
should be used as one of the points of 
demarkation or departure in the Indian 
deeds of Waterbury, and also that the 
undiscovered Mr.Taylor whose name had 
been given to the height before the first 
Indian deed of Waterbury was drawn, 
should have made use of it in viewing 
and exploring the wilderness in the pre- 
historic days of Mattatuck. 

The most prominent and elevated ridge 
of Mount Taylor was called :\Iount Tay- 
lor rock. The western extremity of the 
rock has its perpendicular face to the 
southward, and, with its abrupt ending 
at the river westward, it nearly cuts off 
the valley at that point. The eastern 
end has a greater altitude, but termi- 
nates on the level summit of a wall of 
rock which presents an abrupt face to the 
brook below. At this point were located 
the " Deer Stakes," where deer pursued 
and driven from among the hills either 
northward or southward of the place 



would have to pass in close quarters — the 
large and plentiful boulders thereabouts 
affording hiding places for hunters. 

About a century ago the most south- 
erly ridge of Mount Taylor rock became 
known as the Rattlesnake ledge. 

Between Rattlesnake ledge and Moimt 
Taylor rock there is a depression that 
was once in cultivation and has not alto- 
gether gone back to its original wildness. 
A house once stood there, the marks of 
which, perhaps, may still be seen. 
Apple trees are near by, and a little 
brook not far off; where birds sing and 
the sun shines in, just as it did when 
Mr. Southmayd had there one of his sev- 
eral farms. A steep road leads up to 
the old house-site, which may have been 
made by the planters — for this is the 
place designated in the "old book" as 
that where the rails were obtained to 
build the west fence of their common 
field. 

From Mr. Southmayd the land passed 
to one or more of his Bronson grand- 
children, and the first person mentioned 
on record as being in possession of a 
house there was a widow named Roberts; 
the last one, probabl3% was James Har- 
rison Warner. 

The most southern pinnacle or ridge of 
Mount Taylor, separated from Mount 
Taylor rock by a deep depression, was 
called at a later day Bull Plain rock or 
rocks, from Deacon Samuel Bull of 
Woodbury — who married the widow of 
Deacon Thomas Hickcox — and the an- 
cient Hancox plain adjoining became 
Bull plain. Through the deep depression, 
mentioned above, ran a highway from 
Buck's hill to Watertown. Where it 
crossed Hancox brook there was a mill 
(Scott'sj, and to this mill ran the highway 
from our North Willow street, following 
the course of the common fence all the 
way. 

The Blount Taylor rock range extends 
to the northward along the western bor- 
der of Hancock's brook to the old mill at 
Greystone, and its most northern peak 
was called Pine hill. In some places it 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



711 



presents a declivitous front to the brook, 
overhanging its own base. A portion of 
this lofty ledge, seen from the valley of 
the brook, presents the appearance of a 
lion's face. This, it is thought, is what 
was, in the records, called Anthony's 
nose. There is also a clear profile 
resembling that of Washington. 

Marks of once existing highways, the 
records, and the natural circumstances of 
the case lead to the belief that this sec- 
tion was formerly open to the outside 
world. Mount Taylor, m its whole 
length from its southern point of Bull 
Plain rocks to Greystone, is about two 
miles long. 

TAYLOR'S M E D I T A T I O N— Is 
thought to be the hill around which the 
New England railroad curves so sharply 
before reaching Tolles station. 

THE THREE SISTERS, ALIAS 
THE THREE BROTHERS— In 1673, 
the ' ' three chestnut trees growing from 
one root," represented on page 193, 
formed a boundary corner of New Haven 
and Milford townships. Later, Waterbury 
and Wallingford met at the same bound 
with the former places. At onetime and 
another, the same tree has been the cor- 
ner of nine different towns. The south- 
west corner of Wallingford became the 
southwest corner of Cheshire; the north 
end of ^Milford became Woodbridge ; 
eventually, the southwest part of Chesh- 
ire (and the southeast part) became 
Prospect ; the northwest corner of New 
Haven became the town of Bethany, and 
the southeast corner of Waterbury and 
northern part of Woodbridge became 
Naugatuck. Thus, this historic tree 
(being three in one) has, during its life, 
remained on its own root and yet lived in 
nine townships. It is also distinguished 
as the corner bound of two counties — 
Hartford and New Haven — which it con- 
tinued to be until Waterbury was trans- 
ferred from Hartford county to New 
Haven county. 

TOANTIC BROOK— This brook an- 
ciently ran out of the east side of Toantic 



pond or lake, flowed easterly down the 
hill into the valley at the foot of Twelve- 
Mile hill, then ran northward and united 
with what is now Long Meadow brook 
After Long Meadow pond was made, the 
name of Long Meadow bi'ook supplanted 
that of Toantic from the confluence of 
the two original streams to the river. 

TOANTIC HILL— The fine elevation 
that rises to a height of S80 feet on the 
southwest side of Long Meadow pond. 
It is thirty feet higher than the ancient 
Twelve-Mile hill. It is now known as 
Woodruff's hill. The name was variously 
applied to the several eminences about 
the pond. 

TOANTIC MEADOW— In the heart 
of ancient Gunntown. The basin on 
ancient Toantic brook east of the bend 
of it. Joe's hill is on the north, Saw-Mill 
hill on the east, Twelve-Mile hill on the 
south, Lewis's hill on the west. 

TOANTIC POND— The small natural 
lake lying about one mile below present 
Long Meadow pond. It is between what 
was the ancient Toantic hill in Water- 
bury (now Woodruff's hill) and the Toan- 
tic hill in the Derby township of 1684. 
It is situated (to use an ancient form of 
expression), " up among the hills," being 
on a hill and among higher hills, its ele- 
vation being over six hundred feet. It 
was a point in the boundary line between 
ancient Waterbmy and Derby. 

TOANTIC SWAMP — The swampy 
basin of Toantic pond. The enterpris- 
ing Arah Ward, mill-builder and pioneer, 
in 1754 undertook the scheme of making 
a mill-pond of the region. He essayed 
to stop up " Cockapatane's " boundary 
line (the ancient Toantic brook), by divert- 
ing the water into an artificial channel 
and bringing it to the saw-mill site on 
Long Meadow brook. This scheme was 
enlarged by his successors, Nathaniel 
Gunn and his sons Enos and Abel. 
They added a reservoir at Long meadow, 
since known as Long Meadow pond, in 
which undertaking Noah Cande joined 
for the sake of having the water on his 



712 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



land a part of the time. While Arah 
AVard remained in the neighborhood and 
retained a share of the mills, and had 
begun to build for himself a second and a 
larger house, the dam at the head of the 
ditch Avhich conveyed the water from 
Toantic to the mills was undermined by 
beavers, or in some way gave out and 
produced great disaster, burying Arah 
Ward's new frame for his second house, 
and making wild gravel and boulderland 
of deep muck. A great chasm was left 
in the side hill where it started, carrying 
away so much of the highway as to neces- 
sitate the laying out of a new one and 
changing materially the order of arrange- 
ments in the vicinity. The above deduc- 
tions are the result of a careful research 
in existing records combined with tradi- 
tion. 

MOUNTOBE, MOUNT TOBE— This 
mountain is separated from Mount Tay- 
lor on the south by Spruce brook, and 
extends upward about three miles to the 
One Pine hill in Plymouth. On the west, 
it is separated from Jericho rock by 
George's brook, named from George 
Scott, son of Edmund, the planter. On it, 
the Gaylords and the Warners had lands 
laid out at an early date. About 17S5, 
Victory Tomlinson, owner of a large pro- 
portion of the stock of the Waterbury 
River turnpike, lived on the mountain 
only a few feet from its summit, which 
is S93 feet high. 

THE TIMBERED MOUNT TOBE 
— The uppermost peak of Mount Tobe. 
It is two feet higher than the main part 
of the mountain. 

LITTLE MOUNT TOBE— Thought 
to be the hill at Greystone, between 
which and the mill-pond the railroad 
passes. It is just above tlie Plymouth 
line. 

TWELVE MILE HILL, SCOTT'S 
HILL, OSBORN HILL, HUNTING- 
TON HILL, ANDREWS HILL— 
Twelve Mile hill is the most ancient 
English place name that we can accoimt 
for within ]\Iattatuck plantation. 



The name is applied to that line, beau- 
tiful dome which lies directly west of 
Naugatuck and rises to a height of 850 
feet — forming the northwestern portion 
of Strait mountain — the mountain reach- 
ing down to Spruce brook which flows 
through High Rock glen. The ancient 
Toantic. or Woodruff's hill, is thirty feet 
higher than it. 

In 1671, before Woodbury was, and 
when but twelve families were living 
within the territory later known as Derb}', 
the Colonial government granted that 
the northern limit of that plantation 
should extend ' ' twelve miles from its 
southern boundary." That measure- 
ment led to the summit of this hill, on 
which a stake was placed from which 
surveys were made east and west for the 
town line between Derby and Water- 
bury. The stake stood for nearly a cen- 
tury. The site of it was then faithfully 
held for many years by an apple tree, 
which, in turn, has disappeared, but the 
point is still marked by a heap of stones. 

The restoration of the ancient name of 
this hill, and the replacing in enduring 
and suitably inscribed stone, of the 
Twelve Mile stake — presaged by the 
order of 1671, and placed on the hill 
probably soon after that time, certainly 
before ^lay iS, 1680 — is an honor which 
Naugatuck might well confer upon her- 
self, if, indeed, the ancient towns of 
Derby and Waterbury neglect their op- 
portunity of an anniversary meeting on 
the same hill for the same purpose. 

The first English land-owner on the 
hill was John Standi}', who received a 
grant of twelve acres " at the stake set 
down by Derby men." This grant was 
made about 16S7, and sold in 1721 to Mr. 
Joseph Moss of Derby. 

When Conquepatana, a chieftain of 
the Derby Indians and an ancestor of 
the distinguished Konkerpot family 
among the Scatacook tribe of north- 
western Connecticut, signed the deed of 
the Derby Indians conveying to the set- 
tlers of ]\Iattatuck their tribal rights to the 
lands adjoining to the northward, and 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



713 



said it was good, and that he understood 
it. he reserved, or thought he did, this 
particular hill and its environment to 
himself and family for individual pos- 
session. He sold the Waterbury part of 
it, in company with his son Tom, in 1711, 
to Waterbury. A little later the Derby 
side of it is referred to as having been 
purchased from the native Indian pro- 
prietors by Joseph Moss and his brother 
Samuel. Joseph acted as agent for Water- 
bury in the former purchase. 

Of this hill, Mr. William Ward, the 
appreciative and accurate historian of 
the early settlers of Naugatuck, has 
written: " Ascend in the earlj^ summer 
any one of its surrounding hills and 
sweep the horizon with your vision, and 
your eyes will remain fixed upon this 
beautiful hill. Its fine lines graded by 
nature, curve gracefully from its summit 
in every direction to the valley below. 
It was easy for man to convert it into a 
beautiful lawn. A visit to this lovely 
place on a bright summer's day, when 
every inspiration of its pure air seems to 
lift one above the strife and selfishness 
of the world below, is a delight. Any 
one who can inhale the bracing air and 
gaze on the beautiful landscape, and not 
be happy, should at once retire to his 
lower plane and hide himself in the smoke 
of the valley. Remain on this charming 
spot until the forces of nature seem to be 
hushed into silence, lest they disturb the 
])reparations making to wrap the earth 
in its mantle of night; then turn your 
eyes westward and see the glorious sun 
gently sink in a dazzling flood of beauty 
and loveliness, until, with a final good- 
night flash, it hides behind the Catskills 
— and your soul must be filled with won- 
der and admiration." 

After the above description one can 
understand Chieftain Conquepatana's 
love for his hill. 

John Weed, hatter of Derby, came into 
possession by purchase and layout of con- 
siderable tracts of land upon the hill, in- 
cluding some of the grants to Waterbury 
men, and proceeded to set up his sons as 



farmers in the neighborhood. His son 
John settled before 1732 at the foot 
of the hill near its northwestern cor- 
ner, his son Jonas on the northern slope 
of the dome of the hill, not far from its 
summit, before 1733, and Joseph came at 
the same time and had a house some- 
where on his farm, which lay on or near 
the junction of the hill with the Strait 
mountain. 

Amos O shorn, son of Joseph of New 
Haven, married Joanna Weed, a sister 
of the above three brothers, and removed 
with his brothers Thomas, Joseph and 
Daniel Osborn to the same hill. During 
five years the Weeds seem to have lived 
alone on the hill, Job Pierson being their 
nearest neighbor on Strait mountain, he 
having acquired a house and ninety acres 
from a blacksmith named Holbrook, on 
the top of the mountain near the Derby 
line, in 1729. 

Thomas Osborn came in time to pay a 
good sized tax in 1738. In 1739 he bought 
the twelve Standley acres at the stake, 
and the same year, with his brothers 
Joseph and Amos, he became the owner 
of half the hundred-acre farm adjoining, 
that the Rev. Joseph Moss and his 
brother Samuel had bought of Conque- 
patana. 

Daniel Osborn, the fourth brother to 
arrive, appears not to have come until 
after 1750. 

Dtu-ing this time Joseph Weed had sold 
his house to Joseph Lewis; Jonas Weed, 
having become a physician, had removed 
to Northbury, and Daniel Osborn was 
living in his house; Joseph Lewis had 
also bought the house of Joseph Osborn 
in 174S, and in 1749 had died while living 
on the hill. 

During the seventy years that Thomas 
Osborn spent on the summit, it is said 
that he built three houses, the first one 
very near the stake, but just over the 
line, and therefore in Derby. In this 
house he seems to have lived until 1755- 
From 1755 to 1783 he lived in a new and 
large house that he had built on the 
Waterbury side. After that date, he is 



714 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



said to have built his second house across 
the Hne in Derby— and, in his old age (he 
lived to be 91), to have crossed the line 
once more and lived with William, one 
of his sons. His houses were, as it were, 
in the same door-yard. His Waterbury 
house, not being in service, was, it is said, 
torn down to save the taxes paid to 
Waterbury on it, every fire-place being 
taxed, and taxes in Waterbury higher 
than in Oxford. Tradition tells of the 
lavish expenditure, the luxurious living 
and the unbounded hospitality of Wil- 
liam Osborn on this hill after the death 
of his father. Deacon Thomas (3sborn, 
he having bought the rights of the other 
heirs. He, at last, left it, and the hill- 
top passed into the hands of the Hunting- 
ton family— the first of the name there 
being the Rev. Mr. Huntington of the 
Congregational church in Oxford. Later, 
the Andrews family came into the owner- 
ship of it, and it has come to be called by 
their family name. The summer resi- 
dence of G. W. Andrews is now on it. 
One of the Thomas Osborn houses was 
standing as late as 1885, and the old well 
is still in use. It is forty feet deep and 
has never been cleaned because the fiow 
of water is too great to admit of it. The 
Osborn houses on the apex of the hill 
were, at different times, in the towns of 
Derby, Waterbury, Oxford and Nauga- 
tuck; in the societies of Oxford and 
Salem; in the Probate districts of Wood- 
bury, New Haven, Waterbury and 
Naugatuck, and yet close neighbors. 

TURKEY BROOK-At first known 
as the north branch of Steele's brook. 
An early grant was described as being 
" up a small brook that falls into a small 
brook that falls into Turkey Brook." It 
enters Steele's brook at Oakville. 

THE FALLS OF TURKEY BROOK 
—Above the place where Samuel Judd 
lived in 1730— between Scott's mountain 
and Buck's Meadow mountain. 

TURKEY MEADOW— Now a reser- 
voir for Slade's saw - mill on Turkey 
brook. 



TWITCH GRASS BROOK— In 
Thomaston. Now called Clay brook. 

TWITCH GRASS MEADOW— See 
page 315. 

THE CITY. UNION CITY — As 
early as 1770 L^nion City was known as 
"The City." It was then what might 
be called a little manufacturing centre, 
consisting of a saw-mill, a grist-mill and 
"potash works." In Deacon Gideon 
Hotchkiss's account book are a number 
of entries of ashes "delivered at The 
City" in 1770 and in 1771. 

The accompanying cut represents, per- 
haps, the oldest house now standing 
within the ancient township. The date 
of its erection is not known, but it was 
built either by Dr. Daniel Porter, or by 
his son, Thomas Porter — therefore we 
have a house yet with us that was built 
either bj^ a proprietor of ^Mattatuck, or 
by the son of a proprietor. Long may 
it be cherished by the townsmen of 
Naugatuck ! In 1765 Thomas Porter 
gave the house and sixty acres of land 
to his son Thomas. At the same date 
he gave gifts of houses and lands to 
other sons. The old house is of special 
interest, because within it were sheltered 
and cared for many soldiers in the war 
of the Revolution. It was kept as a 
tavern in 1770 and for many years after 
that date. See p. 456. 

UPSON'S BRIDGE AND UPSON'S 
MEADOW— Were on the Woodbury 
road, now a portion of the Park road, 
between where it leaves the ]\Iiddlebury 
road and the hill. It was an early grant, 
without date, to Stephen Upson. 

UPSON'S ISLAND ROCKS— A suc- 
cession of semi-detached, rugged spurs of 
rock, bordering the river between the 
ridges of Mount Taylor and ^Mount Tobe 
— so-called because lying against the an- 
cient Upson's island — the tract of 
meadow land on an island in the river 
that was set apart in 1679 for a future 
inhabitant, who proved to be Stephen 
Upson. 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



715 



UPSON'S WOLF PIT— East of Long 
hill. 

THE VILLAGE, GUERNSEY 
TOWN — The era of exact and compre- 
hensive lay-outs began about 1728, and 
was soon in full force. The newer part 
of Litchfield county and the newer parts 
of the older towns, then to be laid out, 
were surveyed by the new system, 
instead of the very early one of going 
" as far as the good land lyeth." 

The northwestern part of Waterbury 
was so laid out, and named " The Vil- 



Woodbury was the bound, and was four 
rods wide — two rods being taken from 
either town. The cross highways were 
four rods wide, and repeated every half 
mile, or so nearly so as not to divide any 
single lot — the lots varying in size ac- 
cording to the amount of propriety repre- 
sented. At a later period an additional 
section was laid out on the east side at 
the northerly end. 

After the first lay-out of the village, it 
was found that the line next Woodbury 
had been incorrectly placed, involving a 




THE PORTKR HOUSE AT UNION CITY ; BUILT ISV 

DANIEL PORTER, THE PLANTER, OR HIS SON 

THOMAS. FIRST MENTIONED IN 1 765. 



lage." It began at, or on Richards's 
mountain (lying south from the Taft 
school buildings), and ran northerly, 
parallel with the east line of Woodbury 
township, to the town line road of Litch- 
field, which formed the northern bound- 
ary as far east as the West Branch. 
Within the above boundaries were tiers 
of lots running north and south, sepa- 
rated every half mile by an eight-rod 
highway. An eight-rod highway bor- 
dered the village plot on the east, while 
on the west the town line highway with 



re-survey of the territory included, which 
was a parallelogram of about five miles 
north and south by about two in breadth. 
The village was also embarrassed by the 
lands already granted within the enclo- 
sure, and it was thought best to correct 
their lines — so a re-survey was had, and 
different outlines made. Among the 
tracts included were the Richards-Moun- 
tain land (where the first house in Water- 
town was, about 1700), and Richards's 
land on Nonnewaug hill; Welton's hill, 
where Hillside farm and the Fair grounds 



7i6 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



are, the original hill being the eminence 
southwest of the Fair grounds and north 
of the Minortovvn road, but the name 
spread to the adjoining lands of the same 
owner; and Southmayd's meadow, now 
covered by a pond (Big meadow) at the 
head of a branch of Nonnewaug brook, 
spoken of in Southmayd's lay-out as " a 
sprain of Woodburj' river." 

There was considerable trouble first 
and last in the lay-out of the Village. 
A number of committees were appointed, 
various sets of instructions given, some 
preremptory mandates and changes 
made, some resignations tendered, and 
perplexity seems to have attended almost 
every stage of this endeavor to live " by 
art." Waterbury evidently did not take 
kindly to that style of lay-out, for her 
people attempted and abandoned the 
same system in the old sequester, and in 
the southeast quarter; and some of the 
astonishingly irregular and indefinite lay- 
outs about the townships testify to their 
aptness at living without "art" — but 
nevertheless, the Village lines to a con- 
siderable extent may be traced to-day. 
Among the early settlers of the Village 
there is some reason for thinking that 
John Guernsey was the pioneer. He left 
and went to Litchfield, and probably set- 
tled on Guernsey hill. Jonathan Guern- 
sey came to Waterbury in 1729. Joseph 
came from Milford in 1734, and built a 
house at the Village. Its frame of white 
oak, it is said, was cut and hewn on the 
ground so near that not a stick of the 
timber was drawn by a team to the spot. 
The chimney was, at the base, fourteen 
by twelve feet, the kitchen fire-place, 
built of stone, was eight feet long and 
four deep. This house was a little 
west of Frederick Judd's present resi- 
dence. Jonathan's house was on the 
northern slope of the hill southeastward 
of Southmayd's meadow, and tradition 
declares it to have been the first house in 
"The Village." If so, he had a town 
house at East Main and Cole streets at the 
same time, which he bought iu 1729. 
Tradition has many bright and stirring 



events to tell concerning the Guernsey 
family; it gave life and color to the 
locality, and ultimately a name — for the 
Village became Guernsey Town. The 
sale and exchange of village lots was at 
the height of its activity in the year 
1734- 

WALNUT TREE MEADOW—Above 
Buck's meadow, below Jericho rock. It 
is now called Bungtown, from the manu- 
facture there of barrel-bungs. 

WARNER'S GOOD HILL — Other- 
wise Malmalick. Land on it was re- 
corded in 1702, to John Warner. He 
called it his good hill. 

WARNER'S MOUNTAIN— West of 
Welton's mountain. Mention is made of 
it before 1700. 

WELTON'S BROOK— See p 353. 

WELTON'S MEADOW— The exten- 
sive meadow west of the river above the 
Thomaston dam. Also the boggy meadow 
granted to Welton between Malmalick 
and Oronoke hills. 

WEST BRANCH ROCKS — These 
rocks lie between the Naugatuck river on 
the east and Purgatory river on the west, 
and south of the West Branch, Eagle rock 
is one of them. There, also lies Joseph 
Scott's grave, the oldest known one in 
the township. The whole region seems 
weird and uncanny. For some reason 
Ebenezer Richards chose the place for a 
house site. There is little now to indi- 
cate that the locality was ever inhab- 
ited. Nature has grown her trees all 
over the clearing that Ebenezer must 
have made, and has reared one in the 
lonely cellar, the walls of which remain. 
Richards was born in 1731 and died in 
1801. He was a man of giant propor- 
tions, and when he died it was found that 
the only way in which the body, when 
prepared for burial, could be removed 
from the house was by taking the casings 
from the doors. 

WEST SIDE BARS— At the point 
where Highland avenue begins. From 
this point to the Litchfield road, the 



ENGLISH PLACE NAMES OF MATTATUCK. 



717 



Woodbury road was twenty rods wide; 
from that point onward, ten rods. 

WEST SIDE HILL— First mentioned 
in 1733, in a re-survey of Jonathan Scott's 
land which lay on the hill at the corner 
of the Woodbury road and the Litchfield 
road of 1729. This land is opposite to 
Watson M. Hurlbut's residence. 

THE LONG WIGWAM—" The path 
that conies from the long wigwam " is 
mentioned very early. The site of the 



single stone of sufficient size to form the 
highway bridge. Said to have been 
so" named, because of the quantity of 
rum required to strengthen the bridge- 
builders. 

WOLF HILL— One of the eminences 
in the wild region between Mad river and 

Fort Swamp brook. 

WOLF PIT HILL—" Next Woodbury 

bounds." A continuation of the Great 

hill east of Quassapaug. 




THE HOUSE SITE OF EBENEZER RICHARDS. 



wigwam is unknown, but the path from it 
was west of the Hog Field hill in pres- 
ent Wolcott. It probably ran right 
through the valley between Hog Field 
hill and Benson's hill on which Wolcott 
centre now is. 

WILD CAT ROCKS — In the rocky 
region east of ]Mad river and above Saw- 
mill plain. 

WINKUM BRIDGE — Over Great 
brook, between the Buck's Hill school- 
house and AVelton's ice pond. It is a 



WOLF PIT MEADOW— The basin 
of lowlands lying at the foot of East 
mountain, between that and the Abri- 
gador. The Prospect road is just north 
of it. A small stream runs out of it into 
Mad river. 

WONGUM ROAD— North of Middle- 
bury centre in the vicinity of the north 
branch of Hop brook and east or north- 
east of Break Neck hill. 

THE WOODRUFF FARM — From 
Samuel Woodruff. Described, when con- 



7i8 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



fiscated from Noah Cande for comijlicity 
in the crime of kidnapping Chauncey 
Judd, as 134 acres, bounded west for 157 
rods by the highway between Waterbury 
and Woodbury, north on Merwin's land, 
and east in part on Long Meadow swamp. 
The same name was given to a farm 
lying east of Union City on the Hopkins 
road about 1750. 

WOODRUFF HILL, TOANTIC 
HILL— The fine elevation 8S0 feet high 
on the southwest side of Long Meadow 
pond. It is the highest hill southwest- 
erly from Waterbury between the Naug- 
atuck and Housatonic rivers. Abel Hol- 
brook about 1730, and the descendants of 
Lieut. Samuel Wheeler of Derby, had 
lands on or near by it. A Wheeler house 
stood at the south end of the hill. Its 
name was derived from the Woodruff 
who was the first settler on it. 

WOODTICK — In Wolcott. It was 
named in the days of the Revolution- 



ary war. Judah Frisbie and Elnathan 
Thrasher settled there, and a saw-milF 
was mentioned there in 1776. 

W O O S T E R SWAMP-This name 
antedates the plantation. It is probably 
the place where Edward Wooster of 
Derby either found Avild hops or culti- 
vated them. It lies along Steele's brook 
from above the village of Watertown 
nearly to Rockdale station on the rail- 
road. This swamp has been the puzzle 
and despair of former investigators, 
simply because it lay so wide spread 
before the view that it was overlooked 
by them. 

WORLD'S END HILL-North of 
Buck's hill. Formerly Lewis's hill, from 
Joseph Lewis. 

WORLD'S END ROCKS-In the 
midst of the Park. They are first men- 
tioned in 1749, by its founder, James 
Nichols, when he was exchanging lands 
for the purpose of organizing his park. 




THE OLD MILL AT GREVSTONE ; I'AGE 710. 



APPEiNDIX. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



Ix TRODUCTORV wStATEMEXT. 

In 1640, "the Magestrate who solemnized Mariedge betwixt any," was ordered 
"to cause a record to be entered in Courte, of the day & the year thereof." At 
that time, there were but three towns in the Colonj-. In 1644, it was ordered that 
the "Town Clarke or Regester " in every town should "keep a record of the day 
of marriage of every person married, and of the birth of every child thereafter 
born within the town." The law also required every man who should be married 
to certify to the town clerk within three days after the marriage "his marriage 
day," and every parent to certitY in the same manner the birth of a child. Five 
shillings was the penalty for every default. 

In the Code of Laws of 1650, marriages, births and deaths were included in 
the requirement; but the time for rendering the certificate was extended to one 
month. The penalty for default was the same as in 1644, with an increase for 
continued delay. The Register of every town was required to make and return, 
annually, to the Secretary of the Court a true transcript of the births, deaths and 
marriages, together with one-third part of the fees which he had received for 
recording. The fees were three pence for every birth or death, and six pence for 
every marriage. 

Whether our State Archives contain — among the unexamined documents therein 
— any of the above transcripts relating to vital statistics, the compiler does not 
know. In the following pages will be found every item that is in the town records 
of Waterburj^ relating to marriage, birth or death, from the earliest inscribed date 
— the single entry of i6Sg — to October in the year 1S51. They include (or should 
include) the records of the present towns of Watertown and Plymouth, to ]\Iay, 
1780; of Wolcott— that part of it lying west of the town line of Farmington — to 1796; 
of Oxford— that part of it which was in "Ancient" Waterbur}' — to 1798; of Middle- 
bury — except the portion of it formerly in Woodbury — to 1S07; of Prospect, to 1796; 
and of Naugatuck, to 1.S44. The town records of Waterburv have been supple- 
mented by those of Watertown and Plymouth to 1790. 

To the above have been added marriage, baptism and death records from 
the First Church of Waterbury, after 1795; and from St. John's Episcopal Church, 



4M' HISTORY OF WATER BURT. 

and the Roman Catholic Church of the Immaculate Conception; also from the 
Churches of Oxford and Prospect. From the First Church of Naugatuck, mar- 
riage and death records, but no baptisms; the baptismal record of that church does 
not extend beyond iSiS. 

Two manuscript volumes of town and family records, begun more than seventy 
years ago by the late Judge Bennet Bronson, have been placed in the hands of the 
compiler by Dr. Henry Bronson of New Haven. These have been fully used, 
together with records furnished bj- a iew interested persons, among whom special 
mention is due to Mr. William Ward of Naugatuck, Mr. Rollin H. Cooke of Pitts- 
field, Mass., Mr. Laurel Beebe of Ridgeville, Ohio, and Mr. Nathan G. Pond of 
Milford. Very much valuable information has also been given by Miss Mary E. 
Cook of Waterbury. To these, and to the unnamed persons who have responded 
to the general invitation that was extended to all, to furnish data regarding their 
respective families, the compiler hereby returns thanks. 

While it is difficult to beheve that Waterbury evaded the law requiring regis- 
tration for more than twenty years, we must accept either that statement or the 
highly probable theory that the original records were destroyed or missing soon 
after 1700. About that date, a systematic effort was made to recover lost ground 
by obtaining from the heads of families in the town, a list of their children. In 
most cases, but not in all, the record began with the first child born in Waterbury. 
In the entire list there is not given the family of a planter who died, or who left the 
town, before 1700. The first volume in which family records are inscribed includes 
land records. The only item in it that bears evidence of having been an original 
record before 1700, was made in 16S9, when the recorder (Lieut. John Stanley) on 
its fourth page announces the birth of his son Timothy. The suggestion is offered 
that Lieut. Stanley, when he removed to Farmington in 1695, carried his records 
with him, and that some accident befell them between that date and 1703. 

Between 1790 and 1S20 very few marriages are recorded; from 1S20 to 1S47 the 
recording of births was greatly neglected. In 1S47 Solomon B. Minor, the then 
town clerk, made a canvass of the town in order to recover the deficiency of the 
records. He recorded 424 families in that year. Between 1S47 and 1S51 no births 
were recorded, except those of Mr. Minor's children. 

The absence of any approach to uniformity of usage in regard to "Old Style" 
and "New Style," even by the same recorder, involves some dates in tmcertainty. 

The usual form of abbreviation adopted by genealogists has been followed in 
this work. Where the place of birth is not mentioned, Waterbury is the supposed 
place. All items, not numbered or otherwise indicated, have been taken from 
town records. The numbers guide to the following sources of information: 

1. Records of the First Church of Waterbury. 

2. Records of the First Episcopal Church of Waterbury. 

3. Watertown Town Records. 

4. Plymouth Town Records. 

5. Salem (now Naugatuck) Church Records. 

6. Oxford Church Records. 

7. Marriages by Deacon Samuel Lewis, Justice of the Peace, taken from his 

record, now in the possession of Jlr. William Ward of Naugatuck. 

8. Records of the Church of the Immaculate Conception, Waterbury. 

9. Columbia (now Prospect) Church Records. 

All items from other sources are in brackets. Orcutt's History of Wolcott 
has made it unnecessary to examine the records of that part of Ancient Water- 
bury. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AiuioT. Adams. 

Daniel Abbot, s. of Stephen, m. L. Smith, 
d. of Joseph of Wallingford, Mch. i, 
1763. Lois, wid. of Dan. m. I. Scott. 

1. David, b. June 6, 1764 [m. Sarah Tyler]. 

2. Daniel, b. June 24, 176S. 

3. Lois, b. Oct. 31, 1771 [m. Ed. Perkins]. 

4. Stephen, b. Apr. 26, 1778; d. Feb. 15, 1780. 

5. Hannah, b. Feb. 8, 1780 [m. A. Hine]. 

[Hannah, mother of Daniel, d. Dec. 25, 
1S03, a. 103.] 

Daniel Abbot, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m. Lois 
Terrill, d. of Benjamin, July 25, 17S7. 

1. Polly, b. Aug. 12, 1792. 

2. Daniel, b. Sept. 18, 1796. 

David Abbot [s. of David] m. Charlotte 
E. Sj^erry, d. of Edwin, June 16, 1S50. 

Emma Abbottm. Henrj- Townsend,iS27. 

Jane Abbott m. Harris Fenn, 1839. 

Justina Abbott m. William Ellis, 1S45. 

Abigail Adams m. Benjamin Judd, 173S. 

Abraham Adams [from Newtown] m. 
Hannah Warner, d. of Samuel, May 
14, 1753. She d. Feb. 21, 1817.^ 

I. Ely, b. Jan. 28, 1756. 
■2. Mabel, b. Dec. 6, 175S; m. J. WoodruiT. 
Samuel, bap. June 2, 1771.- 

Andrew Adams, s. of Eli, m. Comfort 
Osborn, d. of Thomas of Oxford, May, 
1797. He d. Sept. 14, 1830; she, Dec. 
24, 1840. 

1. Clarry Simons, b. Feb. 14, 1800. 

2. Hannah, b. June i, 1805; m. Ed. Warner? 

3. Nabby, b. Mch. 6. 1807. 

4. Constant Lockwood, b. Dec. 14, 1810. 

5. Harriet, b. Oct. 17, 1814; m. Oliver Evans? 

Augustus Adams m. Hannah E. John- 
son, Aug. 20, 1820. He d. Nov. 6, 1824; 
she, Aug. 27, 1826. 

1. Edward, b. Dec. 2, 1S20. 

2. George Sylvester, b. June 10, 1823. 

Chauncey C. Adams, s. of Wm., m. Dec, 
iSiS, Maria Pope, b. Feb., 1797, d. of 
Robert. 

1. William Hopkins, b. Sept. 26, 1S19. 

2. Sarah Ann, b. Nov. 8, 1821; d. 1827. 

3. Maria Sarah, b. Jan. 7, 1824. 

4. Harriet Rebecca, b. Aug. 27, 1826. 

5. Samuel B., b. Nov. 7. 1828. 

6. James, b. Aug. 16, 1831. 

7. Susan, b. Jan. 10, 1834. 

8. Nancy, b. Apr. 10, 1836. 

9. George Augustus, b. Apr. 20, 183S. 
10. Jane Jennet, b. Nov. 30, 1840. 



Adams. Adams. 

Chester Adams of Simsbury, m. Eunice 
A. Austin (d. of Edm. 2d), Oct. 21, 1S27. 
She d. Apr. 14, 1833, and he, " of Hart- 
ford," m. Eliza Austin (d. of Edm. 2d), 
Oct. 10, 1S36, who d. Oct. 12, 1S39. 

Constant L. Adams m. Emily Davis, 
Aug. 5, 1830 [and d. 1S41]. 

Eli Adams, s. of Abr., m. Anna Baldwin, 
d. of Mat., Nov. 15, 1775. [He d. 1830; 
she, 1S41.] 

1. Nabby, b. July 11, 1776; m. Enos Osborn. 

2. Andrew, b. Oct. 21, 177S. 

3. Truman, b. Apr. 17, 1786. 

Emeritt Adams m. T. Bocimsdes, 1835. 
Enos O. Adams m. Eliza R. Smith, both 

of Naugatuck, Sept. S, 1S51. 
John Adams, s. of Wm., m. Sarah Bron- 

son, d. of James, May 25, 1780. 

1. Esther, b. Mar. 21, 17S1. 

2. Fanny, b. Mch. 7, 1783. 

3. Henoni, b. Feb. 25, 1785. 

4. Sarah, b. Feb. 6, 1787. 

s. Hannah, b. Dec. i, 1789. 

6. Juliana, b. June 24 ; d. Dec. 1793. 

Sarah, d. Nov. 21, 1793: and John m. 
Cynthia Fitch, d. of Eben. of Wal., 
May 21, 1794. 

7. Luther Fitch, b. May 31, 1795. 
Lucius, bap. Aug. 27, 1797.' 
[Amanda] m. Major Terrill, 1823. 
John. bap. Dec. i, 1799. 
(leorge, bap. Oct. 19, 1806. 

John Adams m. Charlotte Taft of East 

Granby, ]May 6, 1850. 
Luke Addams, s. of Wm., was mar. to 

Lucy Nichols, d. of Jos. dec'd. by Rev. 

Mark Leavenworth, Jan. 3, 1782. 

1. Anne, b. Aug. 31, 1782. 

2. Susanna, b. Sept. 16, 1784. 

3. Bt-tsy, b. Dec, 21, 17S6. 

Luther Adams of Bristol m. Rosetta 

Hotchkiss, Nov. 8, 1846. 
Nancy Adams m. Abner Scott, 1821. 
Nancy J. Adams m. Wm. Clark, 1828. 
[Reuben Adams, s. of Sam., m. Hannah 

Clark, d. of David. He d. Oct. 5, 1837; 

she, May 9, 1S51. 

1. Samuel, b. Sept 11, 1794- 

2. Sally, b. Sept. 24, 1797; m. Elias Perkins. 

3. Polly, b. June 15, 1799. 

4. Ruth, b. "Jan. 24, 1801. 

5. David Clark, b. Oct. 7, 1803. 

6. Seymour, b. Sept. 11, 1805. 

7. Hannah Maria, b. iNIay 5, 180S; m. Hiram Hine. 

8. Lyman, b. Mar. 24, 1810. 
0. Reuben, b. Oct. 8, 1812. 

10. Gilbert, b. Sept. 25, 1814.] 



6 -M^ 



IIISrOBY OF WATERS UEY 



Adams. Adams. 

Reuben Adams, s. of Reuben, and Maria 
Hine, b. Feb. 4, 1S14. d. of Jonas of 
Old Milford m. Nov. 13, 1S37. 

1. Elizabeth Maria, b. Dec. 5, 1839. 

2. Sarah Jane, b. July 7, 1841. 

3. Charles Treat, b. Nov. 19, 1S43. 
[4. Fannie J., b. Apr. 2, 1851.] 

Samuel Adams, s. of Wm., m. Mary 
Tompkins, d. of Edm., Mch. i, 1764. 
He d. Dec. 13, 1773, and Mary m. A. 
Prichard. 

1. Prudence, b. Aug. 10, 1765. 

2. Reuben, b. Apr, iS, 1767. 

i. Ruth, b. Apr. 8, 1769; d. Oct. 28, 1791. 

4. Samuel, b. July 10, T771. 

5. Mary, b. Aug. iR, 1773 [m. Dan. Upson]. 

Sarah C. Adams m. N. Payne, 1S33. 
Seymour Adams, s. of Reuben, m. Roset- 

ta Baldwin, d. of Eli of W'town, Mch. 

15, 1831. 

[i. Mary, b. Oct. u, 1832. 

2. John Baldwin, la. Sept. 11, 1835 ; d. 1848. 

3. Eli, b. Apr. 2, 1S41. 

4. Ruth Augusta, b. Dec. 19. 1S43. 
^. Rosetta, b. Mch. 17, 1840.] 

Sylvanus Adams, s. of Wm., m. Sarah 
Hopkins, d. of Deac. Tim., Dec. 4, 17S3. 

1. Mark, b. Sept. 16, 1784. 

2. Cloe, b. Feb. 4, 1786. 

3. Mark, b. Oct. iS, 1787. 

4. I'imoihy Hopkins, b. Sept. 29, 17S9. 

William Adams m. Susanna Bronson, 
d. of Eben., Feb. 14, 1739-40. He d. 
Apr. 23, 1793 (a. 79), and she, Mar. 22, 
1812. 

1. Samuel, b. Aug. g, 1740. 

2. Prudence, b. Mch. 31, 1742 ; d. Oct. 10, 1743. 

3. William, b. July 11, 1744; d. Oct 12, 1747. 

4. Prudence, b. .■\pr. 24, 1746; d. Oct. 12, 1747. 

5. William, b. June i, 1748. 

6. Susanna, b. Nov 24, 1740; m. R. Bronson. 

7. John, b. Feb 2, 1751-2. 

8. James, b. Feb. 11, 1754 : d. Feb. 22, 1789. 

9. Luke, b. Mch. 8, 1756. 

10. Silvanus, b. Jan. 22, 1759. 

11. Ruth, b. Dec. 14, 1761 ; d. Nov. -sif^ 171^7. 

12. Asael, I). July 2S, 1764. 

William Adams, Jr., s. of Wm., m. Sarah 
Goodwin of Lebanon, Feb. 2, 1775. 

1. Merick, b. Aug. 30, 1776; d. Nov. 30, 1785. 

2. Sena, b. June 5, 1778. 

3. Sarah, b. Jan. 13, 1780; d. Apr. 18, 17S4. 

4. Jesse, b. Jan 4, 1782 ; d. Aug. 27, 1825. 

5. Meiick, b. Mch. 20, 1786; d. Jan. 27, 1794. 

Sarah, d. Feb. iS, 178S; and Wm. m. 
Orpha Cossett, d. of John, Dec. 29, 1788. 
He d. Jan. 25, 1S2S. 

6. Ro.xa, b. Oct. 3, 1791 ; m. H. Sa.\ton. 

7. Chauncey Cossett, b. Dec. 3, 1796. 

8. -Augustus, b. Feb. 28, 1799. 

0. William Hopkins, b. Feb. 12, 1802. 

William H. Adams, s. of C. C, and 
Rosetta A. Carrington, b. Auo-. 20, 1820, 
d. of Solomon of North Haven, m. Feb. 
12, 1843. 

1. William .41bro, b. Feb. 15, 1844. 

2. Julius Cooke, b. Jan. 29; d. May 28, 1845. 

3. Ella Louisa, b. July 18, 1846. 



Adkins. Alcott. 

Adkins, set- Atkins. 

Emily Albro m. John Shepardson, 1S4S. 
Oliver Albro m. Amanda Hoy t— both of 

Salem — Feb. 26, 1S29. 
Daniel Allcox, s. of John, m. Eliz. Button, 

d. of Benj. of Wal., June 28, 1759. 

1. Asa, b. .Apr. 27, 1760. 

2. Daniel, b. -Apr. 7, 1762. 

3. Samuel, b. May 7, 1764. 

4. Joseph, b. -Aug. 25, 1766. 

David Alcox, s. of John. m. Abigail 
Johnson of X. H., July 2, 1767; d. Jan. 
29, 1S21. 

1. .Anna, b. Sept. 16, 176S. 

2. David, b. Apr. 16, 1774. 

Eli Alcott of Wolcott m. Mrs. Harriet 

Taylor. Sept. 25, 1S31. 
James Alcox, s. of John, m. Hannah 

Barnes, d. of Caleb, Nov. 7, 1765. 

I. <_)bedience, b. Sept. 22, 1766. 
J. Rozina, b. Dec. o, 176S. 

Jesse Alcox, s. of John, m. Patience 
Blakeslee, d. of Aaron of N. H., Dec. 
21, 1763. 

1. Sarah, b. Jan. 12, 1765. 

2. Lyman, b. Aug. 18, 1766. 

John Alcock and Deborah [Blakeslee, 
d. of Isaac of North Haven: 

1. Lydia, b. Nov. 24, 1730; m. Isaac Blakeslee.] 

2. John, b. Dec. 28, 1731. 

3. James, b. June i, 1734. 

4. Jesse, b. Mch. 23, 1736. 

5. Daniel, b. Mch. 25, 1738. 

6. David, b. Jan. 12, 1730-40. 

[7. l)eborah; m. Isaac Twitchell and A. Hotchkiss. 

8. Mary, b. 1744; m. Obed. Bradley, of N. H. 

9. Thankful, b. 1748; m. Thad. Baldwin. 

10. Hannah, b. 1751 ; m. Joel Norton. 

11. -Anna; m. Abel Curtis. 

12. Stephen; d. in infancy.] 

John d. Jan. 6, 1777. 

John Alcox, s. of John. m. Mary Chat- 
field, d. of Sol. of Derby, Aug. 28. 1755. 

1. Liddia, b. Dec. 8, 1756; m. C. Frishie. 

2. Solomon, b. May 8. 1759. 

3. Samuel, b. Nov. 29, 1761. 

4. John Blakeslee, b. June 24, 1764. 

5. Mary, b. Sept. 8, 1766; d. Feb. 18, 1770. 

6. Isaac, b. .April 12, 1769. 

7. Joseph Chatfield, b. May 7, 1771 [m. .Anna 
Bronson, d. of Amos]. 

S. Mark, b. .May 11, 1773. 

0. Thomas, b. (Jet. 16, 1775: d. Apr. 27, 177S. 

John B. Alcox, s. of Capt. John, m. Lois 
Gaylord. d. of Capt. Levi, Dec. 3, 
1775 (1785)- 

1. Reiley, b. June 25, 1786. 

Riley Alcott, s. of John B. of Wolcott, m. 
Olive Warner, d. of Mark, Oct. 7, iSio. 

1. Isaac W., b. July 27, 1811 ; d. Nov. ig, 1826. 

Olive, d. Mch. 4, 1819, and Riley m. 
Ruth Fnsbie, d. of Reuben, Apr. 17, 

1S20. 

2. Jane, b. Sept. i, 1821; m. .A. S. Beardsley. 

3. Gaylord, b. Jan. 27, 1S25. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



Ap7 



Alcox. Allin. 

Samuel Alcox, s. of Capt. John, m. Lydia 

Warner, d. of Ard., Dec. iS, 1783. 
Solomon Alcox, s. of John, m. Premela 

Roberts, d. of John of South, ]\\\y 14, 

17S4. 

I. Lvdia, b. Sept, lo, 1785. 

-> Hannah, b. Jiilv 16, 1788 [m. Richard Withington 

of Bucks Hil'l], 
3. Seth Roberts, b. Jan, 11, 1702, 

George B. Aldrich of Attleboro, Mass., 
m. Mary H. Brooks of Bethany, June 
3. 1S39. 

1. Lewis Franklin, b. and d. Mch. 1840. 

2. George Franklin, b. Mch. 29, 1844. 

Hannah Alford m. Thomas Welton, 1-14. 
Abigail Allin m. Amos Hamilton, 1771. 
Abigail Ailing m. Constant Miller, 1776. 
Alvira R. Ailing m. Almon Piatt, iSirj. 
David Ailing and Ruth: 
I. Miles, b. May 11, 1777- 

David Ailing, s. of Isaac, m. S. D. Web- 
ster of Harwinton, Mch. 12, 1S39. 

1. George Isaac, b. Apr. 25, 1842. 

2. Eunice Jennet, b. Apr. 3, 1S44. 

3. Rhoda Sabrina, b. Jan. 31, 1846. 

Ebenezer Allyn, s. of Gideon, m. Tabitha 
Clark, d. of Joseph. Nov. g, 1742. 

1. Rachel, b. Sept. 20, 1744; m. S. Blakeslee. 

2. Gideon, b. Mch. 15, 1746. 
:;. John, b. Mch. 17, 1747. 

4. i)avid, b. Apr. 26, 1749. 

5. Abi,gail, b. May 29, 1751. 

6. Abel, b. Apr. 22, 1753 

7. Ashlil, b. May 21, 1755. 

S. Tal'it/ia, b. Mch. 22, 1757. 

Tabitha. d. Feb. 7. 1756; and Ebenezer 
m. Abigail Way, d. of David, June 24. 
1756- 

8. Tabitha, b. Mch. 27, 1757. 

9. Sarah, b. Sept. 17, 1759. 

10. Leucy, b. Aug. 6, d. May g, 1761. (?) 

11. Leucy, b. May 13, 1763, 

Edward Allen m. Thankful Smith. Apr. 

17, 1S42. 
Ephraim Allen and Elizabeth: 

2. Elizabeth, b. Jan. 7, 174S-0, 

3. Mary, b. June 20, 1751. 

4. Hannah, b. July 31. 1753. 

Ephraim m. Hannah Humiston, d. of 
John, April 5, 1754. 

5. Lidda, b. Sept. 19, 1756. 

6. John, b. Jan. 13, 175Q. 

7. Russel, b. Apr. 30, 1762. 

Gideon Allin: 

Ebenezer; m. 1742. 
Deborah; ra. Asahel Castle, 1745. 
Mehitable; m. I\L Blakeslee, 1746. 
Mary; m. (Coben?) and S. How, 1750. 

Gideon m. Naomy, rellicque of Josiah 
Tuttle, Dec. 6, 1751. [She was Naomi 
Blakeslee, 1779, at the date of distribu- 
tion of Gideon's estate.] 

Solomon, b. Oct. 7, 1753. 



Allen. Ames. 

Gideon Allen, Jr., [s. of Ebenezer] m. 
Lettis Curtis, Oct. 7, 1766. 

Hannah Allyn m. Tille Blakeslee, 1751. 
Hannah O. Ailing m. Geo. Palmer, 1S26. 

Harvey Allen m, Polly Brown, Sept. 2, 

1S32. 

Isaac Allyn m. Sarah Roberts, d. of Joel, 
Aug. 13, iSoi. 

1. William Lewis, b. Dec. 10, 1802. 

2. Tamer, b. Au.g. 19, 1805; m. J. M. Forest. 

3. Elizabeth, b, July 2, 1808; m. G. Post. 

4. Sarah, bap, June 12, 1810.I 

5. Isaac Merit, bap. Sept 29, 1812. 

6. Gilbert, bap. June 4, 1815. 

7. Sarah, bap, Apr 25, 1819. 

Isaac M. Allen, son of Isaac, m. Betsey 
Hine, d. of Benj. of M'bury, Aug. 9, 
1835. 

1. Elizabeth, b. Aug. 13, 1836. 

2, Wilbur F., b. -Aug. 12, 1844. 

Isaac E. Ailing of Hamden m. Elizabeth 

C. Scovill, Sept. 3, 1S4S. 

Johannah Allyn m. Zeba Matthews, 1S06. 
John Allen:' 

Rhoda, b. Sept. 28, 17S4. 
William Henry, b. April 17, 1786. 
Roswell, b. May 29, 1788. 

Joseph J. W. Allen of Massellon. Ohio, 

m. Laura A. Hoadly of Nati., May 9, 

1847. 
Lyman Allen m. Betsey Cowel, Dec. 12, 

1S31. 
Mary Allen m. George Lawrence, 1S48. 
Melissa Allen m. E. W. Webster, 1844. 
Norman Ailing, b. Nov. 9, 1S09, s. of 

Isaac, 2d, m. Rebecca Prichard, d. of 

Elias, Aug. 4, 1S32. 

1, Sarah Jennet, b. Sept. 6, 1834. 

2, Emerett, b, June 21, 1836. 

:;. Cornelia Mary, b. Aug. 22, 1840. 

4. Jane Eliza, b, Apr. 4, 1842. 

5. William Edgar, b, Aug. 26, 1845. 

Rebekah Allen m. Azariah Woolworth, 

l3l2. 

Solomon Allin m. Lydia Blakeslee, Nov. 
24, 1773. She d. Aug. 21, 1777. 

I, Linus, b, July 27, 1774, 

William L. Allen, s. of Isaac, m. Betsey 
Cowell. d. of Sam., Sept. 18, 1S2S. 

1. James, b. Sept. 22, 1829. 

2. Edson, b. Oct. 22, 1835. 

3. Mary Ann, b. June 3, 1843. 

William W. Allen, s. of Philo of Wood- 
bridge, m. Maria Stoddard, d. of Abijah 
of Nau., Aug., 1S41. 

1. Jane Eliza, b. Mch, 4, 1S41. 

2, William Dwight, b, July 23, 1S43. 
:;, Esther Maria, b. Mch. 5, 1845. 

Axa Ames m. Fred. Dunbar, 1S24. 



8AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY 



Ames. Andrus. 

Samuel Ames was m. to Axsa Beebe, 
Dec. 17S4, by Deac. Samuel Lewis, J. P. 

Andrew Anderson m. Philena Jones, Dec. 
2S, 1835. 

George Anderson m. Lucy Doolan. July 
5, i'~^49- 

Henry P. Anderson, b. in North Brain- 
tree, Mass., Nov. 28, iSoo, m., May 27, 
1825, Hannah W. Hodge, b. in Norton, 
Mass., Dec. 28, 1S03 

I. George W., b. in Ware, Mass., May 2, 1S26. 
.'. Hannah S., b. in Barre, Mass., July ^i. 182S; 111. 
J. F. Swift. 

Johnson Anderson, s. of Joseph of Bos- 
ton, m. Esther Prichard, d. of Benja- 
min, Apr. 4, 1761. 

I. Asa, b. July 25, 1760. (?) 
Hannah, bap. Jan. 19, 1766^2 
Benjamin, bap. Oct. 9, 176S. 

Johnson m. Lucy Hodge, Aug. 4, 1783." 
Abraham Andruss, Senor [and Rebec- 
ca]; record 0/ ye c/i/ldren: 

May I. Rebeckah, b. Dec. ift, 1672; ni. W. Hikco.\. 

25, 2, Mary, b. Mch. 10, 1674-5; 

1703. m. Daniel Warner. 

3. Hannah, b. Sept. 8, 167S [m. Z. Northrop]. 

4. Abraham, b. Oct. 14, 1680. 

5. Sarah. b. Mch. 16, 1683-4; 

m. Joseph Lewis, and Isaac Bronson. 

6. Rachel], b. July 11, 1686 [m. S. Orvicel. 

7. John, b. July 16, 1688. 

8. Thomas, b. Mch. 6, 1604. 

[He died between July ist and Dec. 
31st, 1729.] 

Abraham Andrus, Jr., s. of Abraham, m. 
Hannah Stephens, d. of Thomas of 
Middletown, Nov. 5, 1702. 

I. A son, b. Sept. 6, 1703. 

Abraham Anddruss s. of Jno [of Wethers- 
field], m. Mabel Thomas, d. of Sam., 
June 6, 1744. 

1. Hiilda, b. Mch. 2, 1745-6. 

2. Eldad, b. Feb. i, 1747-8. 

3. Elihu, b. Jan. 10, 1740-50. 

4. Loly, b. Nov. 3, 1751. 

5. Asenath, b. Mch. 15, 1754. 

6. Ethan, b. May 9, 1756. 

7. Oylive, b. May 30, 1759. 

8. Rhodah, b. July 19, 1761. 
o, Ephriam, b. May 18, 1765. 

10. ^Mallei, b. July :o, 1768. 

Anna Andrews m. Nathan Scott, 1777. 
Daniel Andrew^s: 

7. A dau. Etathier, b. A\>r. (i, 1785. 

David and Margaret Andrus, children 
born in Waterbury: 

1. John, b. Feb. 17, 1749. 

2. Margaret, b. Nov. 15, 1752. 

3. David, b. Feb.; d. Aug. 17, 1754. 

4. A dau. b. Sept. 30, 1755. 

5. David, b. Apr. 16, 1757. 

6. Achsah, b. Mch. 18, 1759. 

7. Elijah, b. Dec. 18, 1760. 

8. Reuben, b. Sept. 5, 1762; d. May 30, 1763. 

Margaret, wife of David, d. Apr. iq, 
1763. Their d. Mary, b. at Kensing- 
ton [April, 1748], d. Aug. 21, 1749. 



Andrews. Andriss. 

Elihu Andrews m. Sarah Brown [d. of 
Dan.], Dec. 15, 1775. 

1. Abijah, b. Oct. 13, 1776. 

2. Asenath, b. Oct. 26, 1777. 

3. Syrus, b. Mch. 17, 1780. 

4. Klihu, b. Feb. 26, 17S2. 

Elizabeth Andrews m. Merrit Nichols, 

1S37- 
Ethan Andrews m. Sarah Prichard, Dec. 

8, 1780. 

Eunice Andrews m. Levi Mi.K, 17S9. 

Geo. P. Andrews, b. Jan. 24, 1S21, and 
Roxana Coley, b. June 12, 1S23— both 
from the State of New York — were ni. 
Dec. 3, 1845. 

I. Samuel Frisbie, b. in Litchfield, May 15, 1S4;. 

Harriet Andrews m. Hanford Isbell, 1839. 
Ira Andrews m. Martha Andrews, Mch. 

5. 17S7. 

1. Chester, b. July 6, 17SS. 

2. Johnson, b. Aug. 7, 1790, 
J. iVIarshall, b. .-Vug. 5, 1793. 

Jesse Andrews m. Loly Brooks, Mav S, 
1791. 

1. Miles, b. Feb. 9, 1792. 

2. Ansel, b. Apr. 4, 1794. 

John Andruss [s. of Abr., Sr.] and ]\Lirtha 
[d. of Thomas AVarner] : 

7. Patience, b. Oct. 1726. 

8. Ebenezer, b. Apr. 20, 1720. 

Leander Andrews m. Cornelia Easton— 
both of Bristol — July 13, 1S51. 

Lois Andrews m. Benj. Terrill. 1756. 

Martha Andrews m. Eliah Parker, 1759. 

Martha Andrews m. Ira Andrews, 17S7. 

Martha Andrews m. J. D. Perkins, 1844. 

Mary Andruss m. John Rew, 1743-4. 

Mary Andrews m. Francis Peck, 1S35. 

Mary Andrews m. Chas. Chatfield, 1850. 

Melvina Andrews m. A. A. Perkins, 1843. 

Moses R. Andrew m. Betsey Lounds- 
bury, May 6, 1S33. 

Rhoda Andrews m. Titus Fenn, 1779. 

Ruth Andrews m. Enoch Woodruff. 1837. 

Thomas Anddrus, s. of Abr., Sr., m. Mary 
Turner, d. of John, Nov. 2, 1725. 

1. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 12, 1727. 

2. Marv, b. Sept. 21, 1729; d. Aug. 22, 1731. 
^. Mary, b. Mch. 2, 1734. 

William Andruss, s. of John, m. Martha 
Williams, d. of James, Feb 1736-7. 

Sarah, b. Jan. 17, 1737-8; m. J. Doolittle. 

Martha, b. June 3, 1740. 

James, b. Dec. 19, 1743. 

\\'illiams (later William), b. Apr. 5, 1745. 

John, b. Oct. 28, 1747. 

6. Timothy, b. Dec. i, 1749. 

[Dr. W. A. Alcott gives to William, Sr., 
Mehitable, Diadama, and by a second 



FAMILY RECOBDS. 



■M.g 



Andrews. Arnst. 

wife, James and Ruth: the first James 
havino- been killed by the fall of a tree. 
To William, Jr., he gives Cornelius, 
Anna. b. Sept i, 1777, m. Obed Alcott, 
and Laura (b. 1790. ace. to family 
records) m. Seth Thomas.] 

William Andrews, Junr., m. Submit 
Frost, May 6. 1766. 

1. Elizabeth, b. Feb. ii, 1767. 

2. William, b. Jan. 13; d. Jan. 14, 1769. 

3. Luther, b. July 2, 1770; d. Oct. 6, 1773. 

4. Filo, b. Feb. 3, 1773. 

5. Luther, b. Apr. 13, 1775. 

Zina Andrews, s. of Simeon, m. Sarah 
Hotchkiss, July 21. 1S14. 

Frances [Boem]. wid. of Richard An- 
thony, m. Benjamin Wetmore, 175S. 

David Arnold m. Hannah Prindle, d. of 
Jonathan, July 6, 1763. 

1. Jonathan, b. May 16, 1764. 

2. Smith, b. Mch. 31, 1766. 

Hannah d. July 21, 1766, and David m. 
Mary Swain, rehct of Walter, Sept. 20, 
1769. 
Joel R. Arnold [Rev.] and Julia: 

Ambrose Henry, bap. July 31, 1831.I 
Charles Rockwell, bap. Mch. 10, 1833. 
Luther Hart, bap. May, 1835. 

Nathaniel Arnold: 

Nathaniel [bap. Feb., 1703-4]. 

Tohn, d. Nov. iS, ii\6. 

Sarah [bap. Mch. 3, 1703-4]; d. Nov. 22, 1736. 

Susanna L^ap- May 23, 1708]; m. James Hull. 

(These bap. in Hart.) 
Josiah, b. in Hartford, Sept. 12, 1712 [d. before 

1742]. 

Elizabeth Arnold, widow, and mother 
to Nathaniel, d. in Wat. Feb. 3. 1740-1. 
He d. Sept. 13, 1753. 

St'i' also John Richason. 

Nathaniel Arnold, s. of Nathaniel, m. 
Elizabeth Richason, d. of John, dec'd, 
July 26, 1732. Capt. Nathaniel d. May 
12, 1777, a. 76. Elizabeth d. Oct. 11, 
1773- 

1. Timothy, b. June 4, 1733. 

2. Noah, b. June 5, 1735. 

3. Sary, b. Dec. 5, 1738. 

4. Susanna, b. Apr. 7, 1740; m. Titus Fulford. 

Frederick D. Arnst m. Mrs. Martha 

Smith. May i, 1S2S. She m. Thomas 

Warner, 1832. 
Garry Arnst, s. of John of Salem, m. 

Catharine J. Phelps from New Haven, 

Nov. 17. i326, 
John Arnst [from England] m. Margaret 

Webb of Salem, Oct. 21, I7S4.'' 

[He had 13 children: Daniel, John, Sheldon, 
Barzilla and PoUv drowned, Barzilla, Polly, 
Harshall, Marshell, Frederick, Ruth, Mar- 
garet, Garry. J 

Polly Arnst m. Marcus Terril, 1S22. 



Arnst. Atwater. 

Ruth Arnst m. Caleb Granniss, iSio. 
Eunice Ashley m. Sam. Scott. 1763. 
Sarah Ashley m. Obad. Richards, 1752. 
Betsey Atkins m. Prosper Hull, 1S25. 
David Atkins m. Cornelia Cleavur, Feb. 
12, 1784.^ 

1. Nancv, Tan. 18. 178=;. 

2. R^ndal,"May 26, 1786. 

3. Mnason, Jan. 20, 17SS. 

Elizabeth Adkins m. Jon. Parker. 1766. 
Elizabeth Atkins m. Joel Lane, 1776. 
Esther Atkins m. A. H. Smith, 1S27. 
Garry Atkins of Medina, Ohio, m. Luzina 

Prichard, Jan. 30, 1S37. 
John and Elizabeth Adkins : children 

born in Wat : 

5. Timothy, b. Dec. 27, 1754. 

6. Daniel, ) 

and -b. Apr. 17, 1757. 

7. Samuel, \ 

8. John, b. June 25, 1759. 
Reuben, J 

> b, Mch. 24, 1764. 



o. Reuben, I 

and Vl 
10. Mary, S 



Joseph Atkins, Jr., s. of Joseph, m. 
Phebe Hall, d. of Heman of Farm. 
Julv 30, 1767. [He moved in 1S05, to 
Smyrna, Ohio.] 

1. Rosanna, b. Mch. 5. 1768. 

2. Silva, b. Nov. 3, 1769. 

3. Asahel. b. Feb. 20, 1772. 

4. Samuel, b. Jan. i, 1774. 

5. Xenia, b. June 30, 1776; d. Jan., 1777. 

6. Adah, b. Jan. 9, 1778. 

Josiah Atkins, s. of Josiah. m. Sarah 
Rogers, d. of Deac. Josiah. Jan. 31, 1779. 
[He died 17S2, and his widow m. Amos 
Culver.] 

I. Sally, b. Nov. 20, 1780 [m. Asahel Lewis], 
J. Josiah, b. Sept. 15, 1781 [d. a. 18] . 

Levi Atkins, Jr. of Wolcott m. Eunice 

A. Grilley, Feb. 6, 1S48. 
Mary Atkins m. Amos Morris, 1S16. 
Samuel Atkins [s. of Samuel of Wolcott], 

m. Belinda Bronson, d. of Philenor, 

Feb.. 1S24. 

1. Ellen, b. May 21, 1825; m. H. C. Munson. 

2. Edwin, b. Aug. 16. 1833. 

Amos Atwater of Columbia m. Julia M. 

Hoadley, Dec. 2S, 1820— and d. June S, 

1S34. a. 36 - 
Clarissa Atwater m. S. H. Nichols, 1S36. 
Jane Atwater m. Ansel Spencer, Jr., 

1S32. 
Jonathan Atwater, and Eunice from 

Woodbridge;' 

Polly, bap. Sept. 9, 1S04. 

Lemuel Atwater m. Polly Dudley, May 

17, 1S14" 
Lucinda Atwater m. Emery Mann, 1S28. 



10 -^p 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Atwater. Austin. 

Mehitable Atwater m. Eli Bronson, 1773. 

Melinda Atwater m Roswell Humiston, 
1.^31. 

Moses Atwater d. Ma}- 5, 1S27. 

Nancy Atwater m. Eldad Hotchkiss, 

1S23. 
Timothy Atwater m. Lydia Humiston, 

Nov. 14, 1781.^ 

Ruth, b. July 30, 1782. 
Elam, b. July i, 17S5. 

[Thomas Atwell m. Eunice Matthews, d. 
of Phineas, and had, at least, 

Lovina. b. Aug. 13, 17S7. She m. Sept. 2, iSoo, 
in Whitestone, N. Y., Rev. Glezen Fillmore, 
and is now (Feb., 1893) living in Clarence, N. 
v., at the age of 105;:; yrs.] 

Anna Atwood m. Uri. Bronson, 171)9. 

David M. Atwood of Watertown m. Mary 
Maria Spellman of Norfolk, May 11, 
1S51.- 

Gerry Atwood m. Eliza Ann Hyde, Feb. 
4, 1S34- 

Jane Atwood m. J. R. Richardson, 1S46. 

Lucy Atwood m. Abel Woodward, 1765. 

Mary L. Atwood m. H. Sandland, 1S2S. 

Abel Austin, s. of Abel, m. Abigail Par- 
ker, d. of Wait — all of Wallingford — 
Feb. 5, 1795. 

1. Arden, b. Feb. 29, 1796. 

2. Aaron, b. Nov. 17, 1S03. 

David W. Austin, s. of Edmund, m. 
Nancy Beecher, b. May 3, 1S16. d. of 
Hezekiah of Prospect, Jan. 16, 1S42. 

William Edmund, b. June 10, 1S44. 

Edmund and Sarah Austin: 

[He d. Mch. 1791, a. 52; she, Mch. 1S12, 
a. 70.J 

Elizabeth and Eunice, bap. at St. James'schurch, 
July, 176S. 

Children born in Wat, 

*i. Job, b. Jan, 11, 1769. 

2. Ruth, b. Oct. 10, 1770. 

3. Edmund, b. May 19, 1773. 

4. Lemuel, b. June 22, 1775; d. .A.pril 7, 1S45, ^- 7°-'^ 

5. Sarah, b. Jan. 12, 1780; d. June 23, 1782, 

6. Lois, b. Apr. 20, 17S1. 

7. Abner. b. Sept, 17, 1782. 
3. Oren, b. Oct. 26, 1784, 

Edmund Austin, s, of Edmund, m. Ana 
Wheeler, d. of David, of Derby, May 
5, 1795- 

1. Nancy, b. Oct. 24, 1796; d. Dec. 3, 1S13. 

2. Polly, b. Sept. 25, 1709; m. Rev. Ransom War- 

ner; d. Mch. 21, 1828. 

3. David W., b. Jan. .27, 1S02. 

4. Sally, b, June 26, 1804; d. Sept, g, 1S29. 

5. Eunice A., b. Oct. 30, 1807; m, C. Adams, 

6. Eliza, b. Sept. 12, 1810; m. C. Adams, 

7. Nancy Maria, b, Apr, 13, 1S15; m, S, W. Hall. 

Ana d. Feb. 7, 1S19, a. 43; and Ed- 



ArsTix. Bailey. 

mund m. Esther Porter, d. of Francis, 
Jan. 5, 1S20. 

I. Ellen .Minerva, b. Sept. 3, 1S22, 

Elizabeth Austin m, Shadrack Benham, 
175^- 

Lauren Austin m. Eliza Stebbins, Jan. i, 
iS37- 

Orrin Austin, s. of Edmund, and Sarah 
Hall, b. Aug. 1790. d. of Jared of Ches- 
hire, m iSii. 

Leverett C, b, Feb, 11, 1812; d. .A.pr. 14, 1840. 
Nancy Levina, b. Mch, 21, 1814; m. Luther Brad- 
ley. 
William Hobart, b. Dec. 25, 1816. 
Sarah Emma, b. July 14, 1810; m. -\. S. Lyon. 
George Willis, b. Oct. 29, 1822. 
Caroline Maria, b. July 24, 1S25, 
Frances Augusta, b, Jan. 21, 1S30. 

William H. Austin, s. of Orrin, m. Jane 
E. Richmond, b. Nov. 21, 1S22, d. of 
Bishop of Cheshire, Apr. 24, 1S42. 

1. Caroline Amret, b, Oct. 25, 1S43, 

2. Frederic Hooper, b. May 10, 1846. 

Amos Averet:^ 

Eunice, b. Mch. i, 1780. 
Augustus, b. Aug. 7, 17S2. 
Sarah, b. July 26, 1784, 
Ransom, b. July 3, 1786. 

Abel Bacheldor, s. of Reuben of New 
Haven, was m. to Thankfull Cook, d. 
of Henry, by Mr. Tod of Northbury, 
May 7, 1^747. 

1. Lemuel, b. Sept. 14; d. Nov. 1748. 

2. Abel, b. July, d. June (?) 1751. 

3. Roze, b, Nov. 3, 1752; m. Z. Curtis. 

4. Buley (a dau.), b. July 7, 1755. 

5. Abel, b, Apr. 24, 1758. 

6. Content, b. Mch, 10, 1760. 

7. Thankful, b. Sept. 24, 1763, 
S. Lemuel, b. Feb. 14, 176S, 

Philemon Bacheldor and Mary (from 
Northlield, 1S09):' 

Linus, bap. July i, 1810. 

bap. May 10, 1812. 

Sally, bap. Dec. 5, 1813. 
Corinne, bap. Apr. 26, 1818. 

Amzi D. Bacon of Woodbury, m. Mary 
Leonard, Nov. ig, i~^43. 

Louisa A. Bacon m. Patrick Curtiss, 1S39. 

Sarah Bacon m, Wm. B, Frost, 1S4S. 

John Bagshaw of Birmingham, Eng., m. 
Ann Moshierof Baltimore, May 21,1838. 

John Bahan m. Catharine Kenare in Ire- 
land, Jan. II, 1837. 

1. E-iither, b. in Ire., Nov. 27, 1837. 

2. Margarett, b. in Ire.. Dec. 4, 1S39. 

3. Richard, b. in Ire., Feb. 2, 1S45. 

4. Mary .\nn., b. .-Vug. 2, 1S46. 

Frederick A. Bailey of Thompson, m. 
Salina Moses of Harwinton, Nov. 3, 

iS35- 



The compiler cannot e.vplain this numbering. 



FAMILY BECORDS. 



APll 



Bailey. Baldwin. 

Julius C. Bailey m. Rebeccah F. Judd, 

May 9, 1S47. 
William A. Bailey m. Amanda A. Porter, 

Feb. 17, I S3 5. 
Hector W. Baird, b. 3ilay 31, 17S7, s. of 

Clark of AVatertown, m. [Apr. 10, iSio] 

Sally Leavenworth, b. Jan. 25, 17S9, d. 

of Samuel. 

1. Samuel, b. Jan. 25, 1S12. 

2. David, b. Oct. 1S18; d. Oct. 20, 1S45. 

3. Joseph, b. Oct. 20, 1S27. 

See a /so Beard. 
Abigail Bald-win m. Sam. Lewis, 1776. 
Abigail Baldwin d. July 11, 1812.^ 
Adah Baldwin m. David Hikcox, 1794. 
Alsop Baldwin, s. of Theophilus, m. 

Elizabeth Sherman, d. of Amos of 

Amity, Oct. 13, 1773. [He was b. in 

Amity, Feb. i, 1741-2. 

I. Amos, b. Mch. 26, 1775; m. Sarah Law, and had 
Alsop, b. Nov. 17, 1800. J 

Elizabeth d. Aug. 7, 1775, a. 23, and 
Alsop m. Bathsheba Smith, d of Eben- 
ezer of Woodbury, Sept. 16, 177S. [She 
d. June 15, 1S15, a. 6^; he, June 23, 
1S24.] 

Anna Baldwin m. Eli Adams, 1775. 

Anne Baldwin m. AVm. McKay, 1797. 

Anna Baldwin m. Earl Sperry, 1823.^ 

Benjamin Baldwin, s. of Col. Jonathan, 
m. Elizabeth Cook [b. in Wal. Dec. 11, 
1756], d. of Moses, dec'd, Jime iS, 177S. 

1. Cleora. b. Apr. 10, 1779; m. S. Judd. 

2. Malinda, b. Nov. 10, 1781. 

Elizabeth, wife of the above-named 
Benjamin, d. May 24, 1797. Benjamin, 
husband of the above-named Elizabeth, 
cl. ]\Ich. 19, iSoi. 

Comfort Baldwin m. John Bronson, 172S. 

Daniel Baldwin [s. of Dan. of Wal.] and 
Temperance [Austin, m. Feb. 2, 17S6]; 
record of children is as follows: 

3. Betsey, b. Apr. 17, 1701. 

4. Levi, b. Sept. i, 1793. 

5. Isaac, b. July g, 1798. 

6. Fanny, b. May i, 1801. 

David Baldwin m. Martha Perkins, Feb. 

1. Amos, b. Dec. 12, 1778. 

2. Treat, b. June 13, 1780. 

3. Dav'd, b. Apr. 25, 1782. 

4. Anne, b. Feb. 20, 1784. 

5. Martha, b. Jan. 25, 1786. 

David Baldwin, s. of Maj. Noah, m. 
Hannah Leavenworth [b. Oct. 3, 1779], 
d. of Sam. Jan. 30, iSoo. He d. Mch. 
14, 1S42. 

1. Lovisa, b. Nov. 15, 1800; d. Nov. 1S13. 

2. Melissa, b. June 17, 1803; m. G. Hull. 

3. Julia, b. July 5 1S05; m. S. I>. Chipman. 

4. Denison, b. Apr. 30, iSii; d. Nov. 1813. 

5. Davis, b. Nov. 19, 1815. 



Baldwin, Baldwin. 

Ebenezer Baldwin, s. of Wm. of Strat- 
ford, m. Mary Warner, d. of John, Aug. 
26, 1736. He d. Apr. 2S, 17S0. 

1. Ebenezer, b. Sept. 17, 1737; d. Oct. 13, 1758. 

2. Thaddeus, b. Aug. 30, 1739. 

3. Phebe, b. Jan. 22, 1740-1; d. Apr. 4, 1766. 

4. Ame, b. Feb. 20, 1742-3; m. Eliakira Welton. 

5. Ann, b. Aug. 10, 1744; m. Eli Welton. 

Eli Baldwin, s. of Theophilus of Water- 
town [b. Oct. 15, 17S4], m. Mary Nettle- 
ton [b. Oct. 25, 17S7J, d. of Joseph of 
Watertown. 

1. Rosetta, b. Feb. 17, 180S; m. Sev. Adams. 

2. Eli N., b. Dec. 28, 1814. 

3. Joseph, b. Oct. 4, 1816. 

4. Ivlary Augusta, b. Nnv. 23, 1827 (1S17). 

Elizabeth Baldwin m. Eli Beebe, 177S.'' 
Elizabeth Baldwin m. John Scovill, 177S. 
Elizabeth T. Baldwin m. Alfred Doolit- 

tle, 1^43. 
Dr. Isaac Baldwin [s. of Gamaliel of 

New ]Milford] m. Sarah Leavenworth, 

d. of Rev. Mark, May, 17S2. [She d. 

Feb. 23, 1 793-] 

1. Sally, b. May 24, 17S5 [m. Dr. Ed. Field]. 

2. Rebecca, b. June 23, 1787; d. Jan. 11, 1844. 

3. Esther, b. Aug. 21, 1789 [m. Dr. Ed. Field]. 

Isaac Baldwin, b. May 6, 180S, s. of 
David, ist, and Sarah Prichard, b. 
Mch. 29, 1 8 10, d. of Asher, were m. 
Apr., 1 83 1. 

1. Cornelia, b. Dec. 16, 1S32. 

2. Charles, b. Feb. 26, 183.^. 

3. David, b. Dec. 4, 1842. 

Isaac Baldwin [s. of Alanson] of Nau. 
m. Jane E. Brown, Oct. 21, 1845. 

James Balding, s. of Samuel of Newark, 
in the county of Esse.x, in the province 
of New Jersey, was married to Deborah 
Porter, d. of Daniel of Waterbury, in 
the county of Hartford and colony of 
Connecticut, Feb. 21, 1726-7. [He d. in 
Derby.] 

1. Phebe, b. Dec. 25. 1727: m. J. Warner. 

2. Silas, b. April 4, 1729. [He was a Physician in 

Derby.] 

3. Esther, b. Oct. 14, 1731. 

4. James, b. Dec. 4, 1733. [Lost his life in the 

French and Indian War. J 

5. Prudence, b. Apr. 27, 1736 [m. Daniel Chatfield]. 

[There were also Reuben, and Jesse 
(who was killed in the French and In- 
dian War), according to probate rec] 

John T. Baldwin of New Milford, m. 
Maria, wid. of Solomon 'SI. Smith of 
New York, and d. of Eli Clark, Oct. 27, 
1 83 1. 

The original record made by Jonathan 
Baldwin, the miller, lies before me from 
which I quote: "I was born January 
31, 1679-So. My wife [Mary Tibbals] 



12 ^1' 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Kai.dwin. Baldwin. 

born May 27. 1690. Her mother died 
52 days after, and her father died the 
seeond week of November, the vear 
after, or 1691. 

.Mary, l)orn the 8th of September, 171 1, at o 

o'clock at night (m. 'rimothy Porter). 
Martha, Ijorn the 23d of March, 1713, about 3 

o'clock at night (in. Ed. Scovill). 
Abigail, born February 17, 1716-17, about mid- 
night (m. Stephen Welton). 
Rachel's birthday, March 17, 1720, at 6 o'clock 

in the morning. 
Jonathan, born Septeinber 15, 1722. 
Eunice, born March 11, 1726, about noon. 
Hannah, born August 2d, 172S, at 7 o'clock in 

the morning. 
Esther was twin with Rachel, and died .May oth 

after. 
Hannah died Dec. 19, 1747, aged 19 years. 
Eunice deceased three weeksafter, January loth, 
aged 21 years. 
M)^ wife died November loth, 1759." 
Jonathan d. Jan. 5, 1761. 
Jonathan Baldwin, Jr., .s of Jonathan, 
m. Mary Bronson, d. of Ebenezer, Nov. 
12, 1747. He d. Apr. 2, 1S02; she d. 
May 17, 1S21. 

1. Eunice, b. Sept. 12, 1748; d. Mch. 2. 1740-50. 

2. Melescent, b. Nov. 16, 1750; m. [Isaac' Booth] 

Lewis, and Phineas Porter. 

3. Benjamin, b. Nov. 24, 1752 [d. Mch. 19, iSoi]. 

4. Noah, b. Jan. 23, 1755. 

5. lonathan, b. Feb. 27, 1757 [d. iu Marietta, Ohio, 

Mch. 7, 1816]. 

6. Hannah, b. Oct. ii, 1730 [ni. Miles Culver and 

d. childless]. 

7. David, b. Dec. 30, 1762; d. Aug. 20, 1764. 

8. Eunice, b. .\ug. 22, 1765 [d. Jan. 6, 1S40]. 
Q. Mary, b. Jan. iq, 1767 [d. Oct. 1845!. 

Jonathan Baldwin of Burlington m. Jane 
Wooster of Xau., Mch. 25. 1849 

Leonard Baldwin of Torrington m. Susan 
M., relict of H. Hadley, Oct. 19, 1829. 

Lucius Baldwin, b. Nov. 1813, s. of Alan- 
son, and Elvira Hotchkiss, b. Apr. 22, 
1S13, d. of Curtiss, m. Apr. 12, 1S35. 

1. Eliza Lucretia, b. Feb. 20, 1836; d. Feb. 24, 1841. 

2. Ellen, b. Sept. 15, 1837. 

3. Luzane, b. Nov. 4, 1830. 

4. Wallace, b. Nov. 30, 1841, d. Aug. 17, 1S44. 

5. .Agusta Loeza, b. Jan. 17, 1S4-;. 

Maria L. Baldwin m. Wm. Dick, 1S45. 
Marshall Baldwin, s. of Matthew, late of 

Woodhridge, dec'd, m. Leva Maria 

Potter, d. of Samuel, Sept. 7, 1S20. 
Martha Baldwin m. Ed. Scovill, 1739. 
Mary F. Baldwin m. A. A. Scott, 1851. 
Mercy Baldwin m. Wooster Tuttle, 1802. 
Noah Baldwin, s. of Col. Jonathan, m. 

Elizabeth Ives, Aug. 3. 1775. [He d. 

Jan. 9, 1813; she d. Sept. 3, 1826, a. 74.] 

1. David, b. Dec. 29, 1775. 

2. Lucina, b. Feb. 5, 1778; m. I. Prichard. 

3. Leonard, b. Mch. 28, 1780. 

4. Anna, b. July 12, 1782. 

5. Isaac Lewis, b. Oct. 17, 1784. 
1 6. William, b. May 2. 1787. 

7. Sally, b. Jan. 24, 1790. 

8. Xoah G., b. Apr. 19, 1792.] 



Baldwin. Barber. 

Polly Baldwin m. Sam. Cowell, iSio. 
Rebecca Baldwm m. J. C. Pratt. 1848. 
Rosetta Baldwin m. H. H:otchkiss, 1S35. 
Rowena Baldwin m. Wm. Chipman. 1S40. 

Thaddeus Baldwin [s. of Eben.] m. 
Thankful Alcox [d. of John and De- 
b(jrah], Jan. 18, 1770. 

1. Mary, b, Apr. 27, 1771. 

2. Thankful, b. .^ug. 9, 1773. 

3. Hannah, b. Jan. 8, 1776. 

4. Lydia, b. April 12, 1778. 

5. Thaddeus, b. Jan. 25, 1780. 

6. Lyman, b. Sept. 24. 1784.S 

7. Nice (dau.). b. Oct. 11, 1786. 

Theophilus Baldwin [b. in Amity, Nov. 
27. 1735] m. Sarah Strong, d. of Adino 
of Woodbui-y. Apr. 24, 1776. 

Theophilus Baldwin of IMiddlebury m. 
Millecent Pardc, July 13, 1S2S. 

Truman Baldwin of Salem m. Anne Hurl- 
but of Ro.xburv, Jan. 19, 1797.'' 
Vienna E. Baldwin m. S. G. Hill, 1825. 

William Baldwin, s. of Major Noah. m. 
Chloe Hotchkiss, d. of Stephen. Feb. 
27, 1S13. 

T. Joseph Ives, b. Aug. 27, 1S14. 

2. Tamer Eliz., b. June 27, 1819. 

3. William, b. May 13, 1824. 

4. George, b. Sept. 4, 1S26. 

5. KebecLa, b. July 15, iSsu. 

Hannah Ball m. Nath. Tompkins, 1762, 
and Jesse Hickox, 17S1. 

Moses Ball, s. of Caleb, m. Hannah San- 
ford, d. of Ezekiel, June 3, 1756. 

1. Mabel, b. Jan. 4, 1757. 

[Moses d. 175S] and Hannah m. Joel 
Dutton, 1762. 

Timothy Ball from Bethany, b. Nov. 3, 

1783, m. Oct. 6, 1S06, Betsey Biscoe from 
Bethany, b. Feb. 17, 1788. She d. Jan. 

2, 1846. 

T. Betsey Finett, b. in Beth. Aug. i, 1S07. 

2. Harriet, b. in Beth. .\pr. 7, 1809. 

;l Eliza Statira, b. in Beth. July 18, 1811. 

4. Argus, b. in Beth. Mch. 26,1815; d. at Tampa 

Bay, Florida, Oct. 27, 1839. 

5. Bennet, b. May 19, 1S22. 

Edward Bancroft [s. of Francis and Mi- 
nerva (Prichard)] of East Windsor, m. 
Mary E. Hayden [d. of Festus], Dec. 
14, 1S42. 

Henry Banks and Sarah E. Scovill — both 
of Litchfield — were m. Mch. 9, 1851. 

Bridget Bannon m. Wm. Coghlon, 1849. 

Patrick Banan m. Ann Reed in Ireland, 
Jan. 6, 1S37. She d. Oct. 7, 1846, a. 42. 

1. Christopher, b. Oct, i, 1S42. 

2. Rosann, b. Sept. 30, 1844. 

Charity Barber m. Abel Sutlitf, 1770. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP 13 



Barker. Barnes. 

Eliasaph Barker:-' 

Esther b. Oct. 29, 1776. 
Eliasaph, b, Jan. i, 1779. 
Ephraim, b. July 6, 1782. 
Daniel, b. Jan. 17. 1786. 
Wright, b. June 23, 1789. 

Nelson Barker of Harwinton ni. Jane 
Rowley of Winsted, Mch. 24, 1S45. 

Peter Barker, s. of Usal, m. Ruth Curtis, 
June 7, 1764. 

1. Zenas, b. Jan. 26, 1765. 

2. Martha, b. May 23, 1767. 

3. Cloe, b. July 17, 1769. 

Rebecca Barker m. Ebenezer Foot, 1761. ■' 

Solomon Barker, s. of Usal, m. Hannah 
Richards, d. of Jonah of Hartford, May 

9. 1759- 

1. Solomon, b. Nov. g, 1759. 

Solomon Barker, a son of Sylvia Sanford, 
b. Jan. 9, 1784.-' 

Usal Barker and Martha: 

Martha; ra. Ezra Sanford. 1759. 
9. Esther, b. Mch. 20, 1750: m. A. Blakeslee. 

10. Sarah, b. Feb. 24, 1752. 
n. Jonathan, b. July 8, 175-. 
12. Mary, b. May 9, 1757. 

Uszal Barker, s. of Usal, m. Desire San 
ford, d. of Ezekiel, May 5, 1757. 

Elisha J. Barnard m. Augusta A. Brooks 
of Prospect, June 19, 1S43. 

Abby Barnes m. Philemon Holt, 1S06. 

Abraham Barnes, s. of Sam., m. Phebe 
Clark, d. of Caleb. Aug. 20, 1744. 

1. Abraham, b. Mch. 25, 1745. 

2. Zuba, b. June 21, 1746; m. Solomon Tompkins. 

[Abraham died in the French War] 
and Phebe m. Gideon Scott, 1755. (She 
d. before 1762.) 

Amanda Barnes m. Isaac Brown, 1S17. 

Ye record of Benjamin Barnes, Sen., 

children, 

I. first Benjamin was born ye beginning Sept: 
Apr. 1684. 

o 2. John was born Aug. 12 = 1686. 
1706. 4. a soon Thomas was born May ye = 11 = logo, 
3. a soon was born May = 1689. 

5. asoon ebenezer was born March = 15th = 1693. 

6. a daughter Sarah was born August = 15 = 1695. 

7. a soon Samll born abought Mch = 16 = 1697. 
The third born of the above barns being a soon 

dyed ye same May it was born. 
The first born son Benjamin Barns deyed in May. 

1709. 
Sarah Barnes mother to the above named children 

deyed december the 21 in ye yer 1712. 
The 5 son Ebenezer dyed March 10, 1713. 
The above named Benjamin Barnes the Father 

Dved, Apr. 24, 1731, Accounted about 80 years 

old. 
[Benj. and John were bap. in Farmington, Dec. i, 

1689; Thomas, June 8, 1690. Sarah m. Henry 

Day, Jr., of Colchester, 1723.] 



Barnes. Barnes. 

Benjamin Barnes, s. of Nathl., m. Jemiah 
Darrow, d. of Eben., May 22, 1766. 

1. Clorenda, b. Nov. 13, 1767. 

2. Unisa, b. Pvlch. 13, 1760. 

3. Jemimah, b. Aug. 22, 1770. 

4. Oliver, b. Feb. 20, 1772. 

5. Philip, b. Aug. 4, 1774. 

6. Benjamin, b. Dec. 22, 1776. 

7. Isaac, b. Mch. 13, 1779. 

Caleb Barnes, Jr., s. of Caleb, m. Lucy 
Meriam, d. of Lent of New Cheshire, 
Dec. 5, 1776. 

I. Jesse, b. Aug. i, 177S. 

Daniel Barnes, s. of Thomas, m. Han- 
nah, wid. of Luke Fulford, and d. of 
Sam Barns, Mch. 27, 1758. 

1. Huldah, b. Apr. 22, 1759. 

2. Thomas, b. Apr. 19, 1760. 

3. John, b. Oct. 15, 1762. 

4. Benoni. b. Sept. 16, 1764. 

5. Demis (Demaris) b. Dec. 15, 1766. 

6. Edward Scovill, b. Nov. 29, 1772. 

[Estate probated July 7, i77S-] 
Dimon(?) Barnes's wife d. Nov. 19, 1807.^ 
Ebenezer Barnes and Abigail, chil. b. in 

Wat.: 

4. Zophar, b. July i, 1753. 

Edward S. Barnes of Watertown, m. 

Welthy Tinker, Dec. 17, 1S2G. 
Eli Barnes m. Bethiah Blakeslee [d. of 

Thomas], Dec. 25, 1785. 

I. Gorman, b. Dec. 31, 1787.1 

Hannah Barnes m. James Alcox, 1765. 
Isaac Barnes, s. of Nathl., m. Alice Cur- 
tis, Dec. 16, 1762. 

1. Daniel, b. Dec. 4, 1763. 

2. Lucinda, b. Sept. 8. 1765. 

3. Charlottee, b. Oct. 8, 1767. 

4. Ambrous, b. Apr. 15, 1770. 

5. Allice, b. Apr. 6, 1772. 

6. Samuel, b. June 6, 1774. 

[Est adm. Apr. 2, 1776. Sam. Curtis, 
Jr. app. guardian for all the chil. J 
Isaac Barnes, s. of Caleb, m. Lucy Bron- 
son, d. of Amos, Mch. 7, i77i- 

1. Ezra, b. Jan. 13, 1772. 

2. A dau. b. 

3. Lole, b. Dec. 6, 1775. 

John Barnes [shoomacker, 1775]- s. of 
Benjamin, m. Mary Porter, wid. [of 
Samuel], and d. of John Bronson, Mch. 
28, 1728. 

1. Lusy, b. Feb. i, 172S-9; m. Eben. Johnson. 

2. Asa, b. May i, 1731. 

,. John, b. Feb. 28, 1733-4- 

4. Ebenezer, b. Feb. 8, 1738-9. 
Asa, s. of John, d. Aug. 23, 1749- 
Jemima, dau., d. Sept. 15, 1749- 
Ebenezer, son, d. Oct. 11, 1749- 
John, son, d. Oct. 30, 1749. 

Lucy Johnson, dau., d. May 21, 1755. 

John Barnes d. Mch. 21, 1763. 
Mary, the wife d. Jan. 27, 1774. 



14 AP 



IIISTOIIY OF WATERBVUr. 



Barnes. Bakrit. 

Jonathan Barnes, s. of John, m. Sibbel 

Bartholomew, d. of Setli, Nov. 22, 17S1. 

1. Policy, b. Aug. 23, 1782. 

2. Stephen, b. Dec. 28, 1783; d. Nov. 3, 1806. 

3. Sally, b. May 5, 1786. 

4. Merrit, b. Aug. 30, 1788. 

5. Ransom, b. Oct. 5, 1700. 

6. Garrey, b. Oct. 12, 1792. 

7. Harriot, b. Aug. 2, 1794. 

8. Charry, b. Mch. i, 1797. 

9. Chloe, b. Mch 28, 1803; d. Mch. 24, 1804. 

Lucy Barnes m. Noah Humiston, 176S. 

Nathaniel Barnes, s. of Nathl., m. LA'dia 
Ehvel, d. of Ebenezer. Oct. 3, 1753' 

1. Amljrose, b. Apr. 5, 1754. 

2. Ebenezer, li. Feb. 28, 1756. 

3. Philip, b. Dec. 26, 1757; d. July 16, 1758. 

4. Philip, b. May 10, 1750. 

5. Nathaniel, b. May 3o,'i76i. 

6. Lidda, h. Sept. 28, 1763. 

Rebecca Barnes ni. Joseph Pavne. 1S23. 

Samuel Bernes, s. of Benj., m. ]\Iary 
Johnson, d. of John of Derby, June 4. 
1722. She d. May 12, 1760. 

I. Abraham, b. Aug. 5, 1723. 

■2. Mary, b. May 24, 1725; m. John S/atcr-rcc, 1755. 

3. Benjamin, b. Nov. 27, 1726. 

4. Martha, b. Sept. 4, 1728; m. John S/nter, 1750. 

5. Hannah, b. May 29, 1730; ni. Luke Fulford, and 

Daniel Barnes. 

6. Anne, b. Mch g, 1732-3; d. June 17, 1733. 

7. Ann, b. May 28, 1734; m. John ScovillV 

8. Samuel, b. Jan. 20, 1736-7. 

9. David, b. May 29, 1739. 

Sarah Barnes m. Stephen C. Frost, 1S17. 

Thomas Berns [cordwinder, 1724] s. of 
Benj., m. Susanna, d. of Edward Scovill 
of Haddam, Jan. 14, 1721, and d. Nov. 
29, 1772. 

1. Sarah, b. Oct. 7, 1722; d. Jan. i, 172V6. 

2. Susanna, b. Aug. 18, 1724; m. M. Terrill. 

3. Sarah. 1:j. July 18, 1727; d. Aug. 3, 1750 

4. Thomas, b. June 13, 1731; d. July 2, 1753. 

5. Hulda, b. Mch. 10, 1734; d. June' 22, 1753. 
n. Daniel, b. Oct. 4, 173'j. 

Titus Barnes, s. of Daniel of New Haven, 
m. Sarah Peck, d. of Sam., Apr. 11. 
1759- 
I. Asenath, b. Dec. 13, 1760. 

(Loly); m. Eliakim Welton, 1788. 

"William B. Barnes (or Banes) of Bur- 
lington, m. Irene Smith, in Bristol, 
May S, 1S42. 

James and Esther Barrit, children born 
in Wat. 

1. Philip, b. Nov. 2, 1755. 

2. Richard, b. Apr. i, 175S. 

James Barrit d. Oct. 14, 17O7, in the 
SSth year of his age. [Probate records 
add Solomon, John, Joseph, James, 
Robert, William, Sarah, Mary "Wood- 
ruff, Martha Bronson, Exjaerience and 
Esther.] 



B.ARROWS. BaSSETT. 

William B. Barrows from Attleboro, 
Mass., \). Sept 5, 181 1, and Julia Doug- 
lass from Paterson, N. J., b. Sept. 15, 
1S12, were m. Sept. 1S32. 

T. Augustus, 1). July 29, 1834. 

2. Adeline Julia, li. Oct. 16, 1836. 

Abiel Bartholomew, s. of Seth, m. Mary 
Hungerford, d. of David, Apr. 14, 17S5. 

1. Ira, b. May 6, 178(1. 

2. William, b. fan. 16, 17SS. 

3. Polly, b. Mch. I, 1792. 

Daniel Bartholomew m. Hannah Sutlifif 
July 4, 1771. 

1. Isaac, 1). Mch. :;i, 1-- ^. 

2. Eunice, b. Aug. 7. 1775. 

Hannah Bartholomew m. Elias Cook 
1813. 

Jane Bartholomew m. B. F. Leaven- 
worth, i>33. 

Joseph Bartholomew and Phebe [d. of 
Nathl. Richason].' 

Tamer, Bennet, Joseph, and Hannah, bap. Tan. 

12, 1800. 
Orson, bap. June 27, 1802. 
Phebe, bap. June 24, 1804. 

Osee Bartholomew, s. of Seth of New 
Haven, m. Lydia Saxton, d. of Eben- 
ezer, Nov. 16, 177S. 

1. James, b. Aug. 7, 1770. 

2. Gershom, b. ^Ich. I2.'i78i. 

3. Cloe, b. Oct. 3, 17S2. 

4. Eben, b. June 29, 1785. 

5. Isaac, l:i. Oct. iS'. 1701. 

6. He|)sy, b. Sept. 6, 17L.5. 

Sarah Bartholomew m. Timothv Pond 
1764. 

Seth Bartholomew, s. of William of Bran- 
ford, m. HepzibahRobbard, d. of Abiel, 
Jan. 22, 1755. 

1. Osee, b. Nov. 7, 1755. 

2. Leve (dau.), b. Jan. 21, 17^7. 

3. Joseph, b. .Mch. 28, 175S. 

4. Sibil, b. Mch. 14, 1759; m. Jonathan Barnes. 

5. Mary, b. May 24, 1760. 

6. Irene, b. July 25, 1761. 

7. Seth, b. Nov. 14, 1762. 
S. Abiel, b. Apr. 2, 1764. 

o. Hepzibah, b. Jan. 24; d. Feb. 10. 1766. 

10. Gershom, Ij. June S, 1707. 

11. Levi, b. Jan, 22, 176U. 

Seth Bartholomew, s. of Seth, m. Eliza- 
beth Hungerford, d. of David, Dec. 16, 

17-^4- 

1. Anna, b. Sept. 7, 1785. 

2. Rosanna, b. June 17, 1787. 

3. Milly, b. July 15, 1790. 

4. Betsey, b. Nov. 9, 1792. 

5. Jared, b. Feb. 11, 1704. 

fi. David, b. Mch. 28, 1798; d. Jan. 10, 1801. 

Sibel Bartholomew, m. Dan. Hikcox, 

1766. 

Charles B. Bassett of Milford, m. Julia 
E. Hickox |d. of Leonard], Mav 10, 
1S51. 

Eliza Bassett m. W. B. Riggs, 1S30. 



FAMIL Y RECORDS. 



^v\^ 



Bassett. Beach. Beach. 

Levi Bassett:- 

Esther, li. Nov. 13, 1773. 
Lyman, I). Apr. 17, 1779. 
Eathan, b. Oct. 10, 1781. 
Sally, l>. Jan. 13, 1784. 

Lois Bassett m. David Luddenton, 1755. 
Martha Bassett m. John Sutlift\ 1747. 
Ruth Bassett m. David Hummerston, 

1743- 
Eliza Bassford m. Vincent Ihbertson. 

i>4<). 
William Bassford <if Eny. m. Mary J. 

Wilcox of Litchfield, I\lch. 23, 1S45. 

William Bassford m. Alice Marshall, Jan. 

16, 1S4S. 
Ann W. Bateman m. Joseph Kane, 1S3S. 

Stephen Bateman m. Mariah Benham, d. 
(if Elihu, Jr., Sept. 20, 1S26. 

Susan Bateman m. Dr. J. D. Mears, 1835. 
Benjamin Bates m. " Loruanda foott," 
Feb. 9, 1776.' 

Jemima Catlin, bap. Aug. 5, 17S1.- 

Lewis Bates of North Haven m. Emma 
E. Hine, Nov. 29, 1S49. 

Betty Baxter m. D. B. Tompkins, 17S3. 
Isaac Baxter m. Harriet Rnssel, Oct. 31. 

1S21. 
Maria Baxter m. Ed. Robinson, 1S27. 
Almira Beach m. H. S. Pardee, 1S37. 

Anson Beach of Cheshire m. Caroline 
Cande, Apr. 28, 1S33. 

Asa Beech, s. of Joseph, m. Elizabeth 
Benham, d. of Shadrack, Feb. i, 17S1. 

1. Asa Austin, b. Nov. 15, 1786. 

2, Meiiitabel, b. Dec. 10, 178S. 
^ John, b. Dec. 2, 1790. 
4. Elizalieth Lane, b. June 3, 1794. 

Asel Beach [s. of Moses] and Keziah 
[Rovce], chil. born in AVat. : 

1. Lois, 1). July 4, 1701. 

2. Elizabeth, b. Aug. 14, 1763. 

3. Asahel, b. Nov. 9, 1766. 

Desire Beach, wid.. d. Nov. 20, 1S44, a. 
66.- 

Elihu Beach, first child that is born ni 
AVat. : 

Elihu li. May 26, i7r'4. 

Elizabeth Beach m. F. G. Northrop, 1,846. 

Guy W. Beach m. Cornelia Sanford of 
Naugatuck, Sept. 12, 1S47. 

James C. Beach of Cheshire m. Eliza 
Hitchcock [d. of Truman B.], Nov. 17, 
1 8 3 5 . 

James Beach d. Feb. 15, 1S41, a. 59. 



Beardsley. 

Joel Beach, s. of Joseph, m. Mar}- Beach, 

d. of Enos of Woodbury, June 14, 1770. 

1. Nathan Squire, \k Jan. 26, 1772. 

2. Amos, b. Alch. 0, 1774. 

John Beach, s. of Joseph, m. Hannah 
Hoadley, d. of Nathl., Mch. 12, 1772. 

1. Lucinda, 1). Aug. S, 1772; d. Jan. 7, 1776. 

2. Polly, b. Sept. 23, 1773. 

3. Anna, b. Jan. 29, 1775. 

4. Lucinda, b. June 7, 1776. 

Hannah, wid. of John, m. Jesse John- 
son, 1780. 

Joseph Beach [s. of Nathan] and Ex- 
perience [Beecher], chil. h. in Wat,: 

(Mary); m. David Frost, 1761. 
8. Joseph, b. Nov. 21, 1751. 

0. Amos, b. June 23, 1754; d. Jan. 13, 1756. 
ID. Amos, b. Jan. 13, 1756. 
II. Asa, b. Aug. I, 1759. 

Their fourth child, Elizabeth, d. May 24, 1751. 

Joseph Beach, Jr., s. of Joseph, m. Han- 
nah Miles, d. of David of Woodbur}-, 
June 13, 17S2. 

1. Sally, lj. Tune 4, 17S3. 

2. David Miles, b. Jan. 28, 1785. 

3. Joseph Federal, b. Jan. 11, 17S8. 

4. Caty, b. June i. 1700. 

5. Laura, b. May i, 1792. 

6. Hannah, b. Felj. 12, 1794. 
Amos, bap. May 21, 1707. ^ 

Lucius S. Beach, s. of James of Litch- 
field, m. Reliecca, d. of Jabez Welton, 
and wid. of Tyler Bronson, Oct. 16, 
1S36. 

A son by Tyler Bronson, James T., b. Feb., 1S33. 
A dau. bv L. S. Beach, Mary lane, b. June 18, 

183,-^. 
Julietta, Ij. Nov. 7. 1046. 

Luna Beach m. Isaac Scott, 1S24. 
Lydia Beach m. Eldad Mix, 1756. 
Maria F. Beach m. A. F. Woodin, 1S39. 
Minerva Beach m. Sam. Porter, 1S42. 

Moses S. Beach of Boston m. Chloe 
Buckingham [d. of David], Sept. 3, 
1845. 

Thaddeus Beach and Lucinda m. 

June 9, 1783. 

Rachel, b. Feb. 27, 1784. 
Lucretia, b. Tan. 14, 1786. 
Abigail, 1). F"eb. 16, 178S. 

Abigail Beard m. Israel AA'oridward. 1731. 
Mary Beard m. Timothy Cande, 1769. 
Nathan Beard, s. of Samuel of Stratford, 

m. Sarah Smith, d. of John of Milford, 

Apr. 3, 172S. 

1. Sarah, b. Feb. 27, 1730-1. 

2. Samuel, b. Jul^r?^ 1734. 

3. Abigail, b. Ma^, 1740. 

4. Nathan, b. Feb.\2, 1742-3. 

See also Baird. 
Abel S. Beardsley of Watertown m. Jane 
Alcott [d. of Riley], Nov. 15, 1843- 



IG ^1' 



IIlsrORY OF WATEEBURY 



Beardslep:. Beehe. 

Elizabeth Beardslee m. William Cooper, 

Joseph Beardsley of Monroe, m. Althea 
Hotchkiss of Prospect, Apr. iS, 1S51. 

Levi Beardsley, s. of Jesse, m. Esther 
Porter, d. of Col. Phineas, Jan. 15, 17S9. 

1. Esther, b. Nov. 29, 1791; m. G. Graves. 

2. Tallman, b. Dec. 13, 1794. 

[Samuel Beardslee m. Eunice Brown of 
Waterlniry. May 17. 1737. He d. before 
Jan. 14, 1 76 1.] 

William D. Beardsley, s. of Daniel of 
Reading, m. Elvira Stevens, d. of David, 
Nov. 7, 1S16. 

1. James H., b. Feb. 4, iSta. 

2. I Twin daughters, b. Mch. 8, 1823. One d. Mch. 

3. » 12, 1S23; the other named Esther Stevens. 

William Beardsley m. Amanda Smith, 
Apr. 2S, 1S33. 

Dr. Daniel Beckley m. Leva Lewis, d. 
of Capt. John of Salem, in Wat., Mch. 
22, 17S7. She d. Feb. 16, 1797. [He d. 
in Utica, N. Y., in 1S42, a.. 85.] 

1. Gordon Lewis, b. Oct. 17, 17S3. 

2. Flora, b. Apr. 27, 1791. 

3. Leva, 1). Fel). 28, 1795. 

Amzi Beebe, s. of Reuben, m. Jerusha 
Summers of Milford, Mch. 2S, 1S02.'' 

Lockey, b. May, 1SJ4: m. C. A. Russell. 

David Beebe, s. of Lieut. Jonathan, dec'd, 
m. Lydia Terrill, d. of ]\Ioses, Feb. i, 
1763. [He d. in Ohio, Nov. 11, 1S40, a. 
93- J 

1. Allace, b. Dec. 8, 176S. 

2. Arah, b. Xov. 13, 1770; d. Nov. 14, 1773. 

3. Electa, b. June 8, 1773. 

4. Lydia, b. "July 20, 1775 [d. Aug. 17, 1S33, a. 

86Vi yrs.J 

5. Esther, b. June 27, 1777 [m. Noah TerrelJ . 

6. Eunice, b. Sept. 17, 1779. 

7. David, b. Sept. 2, 1781. 

8. Molly, b. Oct. i^, 1783 [m. Wvllys Terrill, s. 

ofjoelj. 

9. Chester, b. Nov. 5, 17S5. 
:o. Augustus, b. Apr. iS, 17S8. 

II. Lomon Constant, b. Jan. 11, 1701 [d. in Ohio. 
Feb. 4, 1827, unm.| . 

Eli Beebe m. Elizabeth Baldwin, Apr. 6, 

177S." 

Eunice Beebe m. Sam. Lewis, 1763. 

Ira Beebe, s. of Lieut. Jon. Beebe, m. 
Jemima Hickox, d. of Gideon. Aug. 
1758. [He d. Dec. 29, 1792, a. 59 (57?,i; 
she d. Apr. i, iSiS, a. 77.] 

1. Eli, b. Jan. 30, 175S. 

2. Usley (Ursula), b. Jan. 9, 1761 [in. Walter 

WoosterJ . 

3. Achsa, b. Mch. 9, 1763; m. Sam. Ames. 

4. Armenia, b. July 16, 1765; m. A. Morgan. 

5. Borden, b. Sept. 3, 1767. 

Jane S. Beebe m. Burr Benliam, 1S29. 



Beei:e. Beeke- 

Lieut. Jonathan Beebe (b. 'isla.y 2, 1709' 
s. of Joseph and Mehitable of New 
London, m. at Lyme, Hannah Lewis 
b. Nov. 2(), 1 716, d. of William, who 
\vas s. of John (and Elizabeth Huntley) 
b. about 1655. s. of John Lewis, who 
came to America in the Hercules. 1635. 
According to town records, they were 
m. Mch. 12, 1731-2; ace. to ch. rec, 
ilch. iS, 1735. 

1. Ira, b. July 30, 1735. 

2. Zeruah, b Feb. 4, 1737-8; ni. L Terrill. 

3. Zere, b July 2, 1740. 

4. Borden, b. Aug. 3, 1742. | 

"An account of ye children of Lent. 
Jonathan Beebe Recorded in Wat. 

Jonathan beebe was born Sept. 24, 1745. 
David beebe born Aprill 12-1747. 
Seba Beebe was born Aprill 6-1749. 
Reuben Beebe was born Aug. 28, 1751. 
Silas Co)istant was born Jan. 15, 1750. 

Lieut. Jonathan Beebe Dyed Jan. 20, 

1759- 
Borden Beebe Dyed In June, 1760." 

Jonathan Beebe, s. of Lieut. J(m. dec'd, 
m. Azubah Warner, d. of Abraham, 
dec'd, Aug. 25, 1767. 

1. Dorcas, b. Apr. iq, 176S |d in Canandaigua. \, 

Y., 1S14I. 

2. William, b. June 23, 1770 |d. in Grafton, U., 

1S40]. 

3. Clarissa, b. July 19, 1772; d. Nov. 4, 1774. 

4. Theodorus, b. Oct. 10, 1775. 

Joseph Beebe, s of Ephraim of Saybrook, 
m. Tameson Terrill, d. of JNIoses, Apr. 
15. I773- 
I. Temperance, Ij. Oct. 14, 177;. 

Levina Beebe m. Sylvester Clark, 1S30. 

Lockey Beebe m. C. A. Russell, 1825. 

[Orellana Beebe, s. of Zera, m. about 
1790. Sarah Hicko.K, b. Apr. 15, 1774. 

1. Cokely, b. Feb. 1701. 

2. Philena b. INLiy •"'. 1793.] 

Reuben Beebe, s. of Jonathan and Xene 
Matthews, d. of Jeoram of New Hart- 
ford, in the Province of New York; 
chii. b. in Wat. 

2. Fanny, b. Aug. 20, 1775. 

Reuben Beebe, s. of Ephraim, m. Han- 
nah Scott, d. of Enoch, June 24, 1776. 
He d. July 20, 1S12.'' She d. Feb. 25, 

1S07. 

1. Amzi, b. Feb. 2^;, 1777. 

2. Cloe, b. Aug. 13, 1778. 

3. Isaac, b. Jan. i, 1780. 

4. Reulien, b. Aug. 3, 1781. 

5. Hannah, b. Nov. 15, 1782. 
ri. Thankful, b. .\ug. 1784. 

Reuben C. Beebe m. Abigail Wooster — 

all of Salem — Xov. 28, 1836.° 
Russell Beebe from the State of New 

York, m. Esther Bristol of Oxford, Oct. 

9, 178S.6 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



Apl7 



Beebe. Beecher. 

Sabria Beebe m. Isaac Chatfield, Jr., 

i8o6.« 
Sarah Beebe m. Eben. Porter, 1774. 
[Silas Beebe, s. of Zera, m. Sally Ellis, 

b. Mch. 13, 1772, in Granby, Conn. 

Feb. 8, 1790. 

I. Alanson, b. Feb. 21, 1791. 

Silas moved to Chenango Co. N. Y. 
1 793-] 
Simeon Beebe [m. Anne "Teril" of 
Lyme, Aug. i, 1750. 

I Elisha, b. Feb. 3, 1750-1. 

Anna], m. Ebenezer Tyler, 1771. 

"Chil. born in Wat." 

1. Clarissa, b. Aug. 20, 1753. 

2. Simeon, b. Jan. 25, 1755. 

3. Martain, b. Aug. 20, 1756. 

4. Ephraim, b. Mch. 10, 1757. 

5. Mehitable, b. Dec. 13, 1759. 

6. Stephen, 1). Oct. 11, 1761. 

7. Phylena, b. July 11, 1763. 

[Est. probated Sept. 2, 1777. Ashbel, 

Artemus, Thaddeus and Polly are also 

mentioned.] 
[Temperance Beebe m. Abial Roberts, 

I773-] 
Zera Beebe, s. of Lieut. Jon., m. Keziah 

Warner, d. of Abr., dec'd, Mch. 19, 1761. 

1. Thene (Parthena Keziah), b. Aug. 12, 1762 [m. 

John Tucker] . 

2. Joseph, b. Jan. 9, 1765. 

[Orellana, b. 1770. Lucy. Roderick, b. 1774. 
Abraham, b. 1780. 
Benjamin, b. Apr. 11, 17S4. 
Levi, b. Feb. 19, 1785. 

Zera d. at Solon, N. Y. in 1S03.] 

Abel Beecher, s. of Joseph of West 
Haven, m. Lydia Porter, d. of Eben, 
Aug. 31, 1762. 

1. Abel, b. Feb. 21, 1765. 

2. Sarah, b. Sept. 21, 1770. 

Abraham Tolles Beecher of Woodbridge 
m. Mary Anne Lewis, Oct. 19, 1831. 

[Franklin K., b. 1832. 
Herliert W., b. Feb. i, 1840.] 

Amelia Beecher m. J. C Fenton, 1851. 
Betsey Beecher m. Ransom Steele, 182 1. 
[Daniel Beecher, s. of Daniel of Wood- 
bridge, d. in Nau., April, 1848. 

1. Sukey. died young. 

2. Parson, b. Jan. 26, 1784; m. iSog, Margaret 

Porter, d. of Truman. 

3. Baldwin, b. 1786. 

4. Anna, b. 1788; m. Calvin Thayer. 

5. Fanny; m. Ezra Porter. 

6. Susan; m. Milo Lewis. 

Daniel m. his second wife. Electa Beebe, 
d. of David, about 1792. 

7. Argus, b. Aug. 16, 1793; m. about 1813, Susan 

Culver, d. of Amos. 

8. Abiah; m. Sam. Hoadley. 

9. Julius. 



Beecher. Beers. 

Daniel m. his third wife, Clarissa Por- 
ter, d. of Nathan. 

10 Calvin A.; m. Adeline Benton, of Leedsville, N. 
Y., and had chil. Adelaide and Henry. He 
d. Apr. 22, 1838, a. 32. 

11. Clarissa; m. Charles Goodyear. 

12. Maria; m. Lawrence S. Spencer. 

13. Sarah; m. Frank Spencer. 

14. George; m. Julia Bristol. 

15. Julia; m. Gustavus Spencer.] 

Daniel m. his fourth wife, Sena, wid. 

[of Hiel] Hoadley of Oxford, Wed., 

Dec. 20, 1843. 
David Beecher, s. of Enos, dec'd, m. 

Mariah Pond, d. of Isaac — both of Wol- 

cott — Nov. 6, 1825, and d. Apr. 6, 1S39, 

a. 35-' 
Eliza H. Beecher m. H. W. Spencer, 1836. 
Emily Beecher m. Merlin Upson, 1836. 
Esther Beecher m. Joel Hotchkiss, 1803. 
Experience Beecher m. Joseph Beach. 
Hannah Beecher m. Ben. Hotchkiss, 1807. 
Hezekiah Beecher:' 

Temperance, bap. Mch. 12, 1808. 
Hezekiah Bronson, bap. Au.g. 26, 1810. 

Hezekiah and Experience: 

Abigail, bap. Apr. 30, 1821. 
William Spencer, bap. June 15, 1823. 

John Beecher m. Perley Frisbie of Wol- 
cott, Dec. 10, 1823. 

Justus Beecher:^ 

Infant, still-born. d. Nov. 1805. 
Infant, 4 weeks old, d. Dec. 1821. 

Lewis Beecher of Prospect m. Betsej?^ 
Caroline Steele, Sept. 19, 1830. 

Melita Beecher m. Ezra Hotchkiss, 1796. 

Nancy M. Beecher m. D. W. Austin, 

1S42. 
Polly Beecher m. Austin Steele, 1810. 
Polly Beecher m. Sam. Judd, Jr. 1812. 

Polly, "d. of wid." Beecher, m. Alonzo 

Neal, 1S27. 
Sally Beecher m. Austin Pier;-)ont, 1812. 
Sarah C. Beecher m. H. B. Peek, 185 1. 
Sophia Beecher m. James Porter, 1845. 
Mrs. Temperance Beecher: 

Sally Richards, bap. June 15, 1806.' 

Benjamin Beaman:- 

Betsey, bap. May 30, 1779. 
Joel, bap. July 9, 1780. 

Mary A. Beman m. J. C. Chase, 1851. 
Amos J. Beers of Newtown m. Jennett 

Pierpont, Apr. 24, 1848. 
Eunice Beers m. Rufus Yarrington, 176S. 
Smith Beers m. Nancy Warner, Nov. 27, 

1834. 



18 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 



Bellamy. Benham. 

James Bellamy, s. of Matthew of Wal., 

m. Mary Osborn, d. of Epliraim of 

Wood., July lo, 1740. 

Lucy Bellamy m. Abijah Garnsey, 1772. 

Aaron Benedict [s. of Daniel], and Esther 
Tro\vl)ridge [b. Nov. 1748], m. Dec. 13, 
1769. [He d. Dec. 16, 1841, a. g6.] 

1. Rebekah, b. Aug. 31, 1772; m. Eli Clark. 

2. Daniel, b. Jan. 17, 1774; d. Nov. 5, 17S1. 

3. Polly, b. Apr. 24, 1777. 

4. Amos, b. July 6, 1780. 

5. "Sarah or Sally," b. Aug. 22, 1782. 

6. Aaron, b. Aug. 9, 1785. 

7. A son, b. Mch. 10; d. Apr. 25, 1788. 

8. Esther, li. Aug. 11, 1789. 

Aaron Benedict, s. of Aaron of Middle- 
bury m. Charlotte Porter, b. Oct. 29, 
1789. d. of Abel, Sept. — , 1S08. 

1. Charlotte Ann, b. Mch. 27, 1810; m. S. M. Buck- 

ingham. 

2. Frances Jennet, b. Nov. 22, 1812; d. Feb. 18, 1830. 

3. George W., b. Nov. 26, 1814. 

4. Charles, b. Sept. 23, 1817. 

S Mary Lyman, 1). Sept. 24, 1810; ni. John S. Mit- 
chell. 

Apollos Benedict of Danbury m. Amanda 
Sanford, Oct. iS, 1S20. 

Charles Benedict, s. of Aaron, m. Cor- 
nelia M. Johnson, d. of John D., Oct. 
I, 1845. 

I. .'\melia Caroline, b. Apr. 4, T847. 

|l'. Charlotte Buckingham, b. June i, 1850.] 

Elizabeth Benedict m. Sam. Stow, 1780.^ 

George W. Benedict, s. of Aaron, m. 
Caroline R. Steele, d. of Austin, Feb. 
7, 1838. 

1. Mary Caroline, b. July 29, 1S39. 

2. Frances Jennet, b. Jan. 2, 1842. 

3. (".eorge Henry, b. May 18, 1844. 
1 4. .Aaron Austm, b. Oct 5, 1840. J 

John Benedict m. Jane A. Yelverton of 
O.Kford, Oct. 20, 1850. 

Abigail Benham m. Timothy Frost, 1764. 

Adelia Benham m. George Grilley, 1834. 

Benjamin Benham, s. of Joseph, m. Sanih 
Hall, d. of John— all of Wallingford— 
Apr. 19, 1756. 

1. Daniel, b. Sept. 6, 1757. 

2. Sarah, b. Jan. 23, 1760. 

3. Elizabeth Royce, b. Nov. 27, 1763. 

4. Abi, b. May 25, 1769. 

5. Benjamin, b. July -ji, 1773. 

Benjamin Benham, Jr. s. of Benj., m. 
Rebekah Tuttle, d. of Reuben of North 
Haven, Nov. 9, 1790. 

1. Lovisa, b. Aug. 23, 1791. 

2. Enos i 

and )-b. Jan. 15, 1793. 

3. Jarvis ) 

Burr Benham, s. of Elihu, m Jane S. 
Bcel)e, d. of Augustus, Mch. i, 1S29. 



Benham. Benham. 

Charlotte Benham m. Shelton Smith, 

1837. 
Daniel Benham and Clarissa :'' 

Norman, bap. May 27, 1821. 
Marcia .Ann, bap. May 18, 1823. 

Ebenezer Benham and Desire: 

1. Hannah, b. Jan. 15, 1757. 

2. Martha, b. Aug. 24, 1758. 

3. Isaac, b. Oct. 21, 1760. 

4. Ester, b. Sept. 23, 1762. 

5. Anar (dau.), b. July 11, 1764. 

6. Ebenezer, b. July 21, 1766. 

Edwin Benham of Nan. m. Patty Ann 
Hotchkiss of Bethanj^ May 12, 1844. 

Hannah Benham m. Henry Cook, 1745. 

Isaac Benham and Lucy [Cook]. She 
d. Feb. 17, 1796. 

1. Catherine, b. July 20, 1761; d. Jan. 15, 1764. 

2. Katharine, b. Oct. 12, 1765; d. Apr. 6, 1770. 

3. Samuel, b. July 11, 1769 [m. Betsey Tuttle and 

d. Jan. 23, 1821.] 

4. George Wyllys, b. June 23, d. Aug. 2, 1771. 

James Benham and Elizabeth: 

1. Jesse, li. Apr. 14, 1768. 

2. James, b. Dec. [1769!. 

3. Samuel Curtis, b. July 19, 1772. 
Sh.adrack, bap. Sept. 17, 17;%.- 

Joseph P. Benham from Middlebury m. 
Martha Langdon from Sheffield, Eng., 
June 28, 1845. 

1. John, b. Jan. 2, 1847. 

Joseph R. Benham m. Hannah Bodine 
of New Jersey, May 28, 1834. He d. 
Mch. iS, 1S3S, a. 35.- 

Lydia Benham m. Abel Bronson, 1768. 

Maria Benham m. Stephen Bateman,i826. 

Mehitable Benham m. ZebahFarrel, 1796. 

Reuben Benham's 

Reuben, bap. at St. James Ch. Dec. i, 1766. 

Reuben Benham m. Lamont Merriman, 
Oct. II, 1775. 

" "P" I b. Oct. 7, 1776; and bap. at St. James 

2. Clarissa) *^'^- 

3. Joseph, b. Nov. 9, 1778. 

4. Lucy, b. Mch. 20, 1781. 

Samuel Benham, s. of Thomas, m. Han- 
nah Johnson, d. of Jes.se, Nov. 20, 1799. 

1. Fredus Mindret, b. July 9, 1801. 

2. Thomas Miles, b. Mch. 4, 1803. 

3. Polly, b. Jan. 17, 1805. 

4. .Susan Maria, b. Jan. 31, 1807. 

Sarah Benham m. A. H. Davis, 1850. 
Shadrack Benham, s. of Joseph, dec'd, 

m. Eliz. Austin, d. of Joshua, all of 

Wallingford, Dec. 4, 175S. 

1. Marcy, b. Apr. 9, 1761. 

2. Leucy, b. June 12, 1763. 

3. Elizal)eth, b. Aug. 21, 1765; m. Asa Beach. 

4. Mary Curtis, b. Aug. 27, 1767. 

5. Catharine, b. Feb. 17, 1770; m. Wm. Rowley, Jr. 

6. Lowly, b. Jan. 22, 1773. 

7. Harvy, b. Oct. 24, 1776. 

8. Daniel, b. .Apr. 6, 1783. 
6. Marcy, b. July 26, 1785. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP19 



Benham. Bissell. 

Thomas Benham and Hester: 

5. Thomas, li. Oct. 19, 17S6. 

Widow Benham d. 1831, a. 84.- 
Mary Benet m. Benj. Stillwell, 1754. 
Catharine Benton m. Th. Homer, 1S32. 
George Benton m. Jane Brown — both of 

Hartford— May 6, 1S50. 
Norman A. Bidwell, b. Oct. 4, 1798, s. of 

Jared of Watertown, m. Rebecca Steele, 

d. of Daniel, Dec. 24, 1S22. 

1. George Austin, b. Nov. 26, 1825. 

2. Frederic Sherman, b. July 26, 1829. 

3. Mary Jane, b. July 4, 1832. 

John W. Bigelow, s. of John, dec'd, m. 

Electa Judd, d. of Walter, Jan. 31, 1S25. 
Egbert F. Bill of Monterey, Mass. m. 

Angeline L. Frost, Oct. 11, 1847. 
Louisa Bill m. Larned Wilkinson, 1807. 
Mary M. Bill m. Larned Wilkinson, 1S36. 
Jane Binyon m. John Hodson. 
Edwin M. Birge of Coventry, N. Y., m. 

Myrctta Porter [d. of Truman], May 6, 

1833- 
Elijah Birge m. Abigail P. Peck, Sept. 

28, 1783 ■' 

Elijah, 1). April 14, 1785. 
Fanny, b. Feb. 1787. 
Horace, b. Jan. 31, 1789. 

Augusta Briscoe m. Luke Pond, 1S38. 
Betsey Biscoe m. Tim. Ball, 1846. 
Frances A. Biscoe m. Wni. Wattles, 1S40. 
[Betsey Bishop m. David Hayden, 1797.] 
Catharine Bishop m. Leverett Stoddard, 

1 840. 
David T. Bishop of North Haven, m. 

Caroline Ives [d. of Giles], Sept. 8, 1825. 
Samuel Bishop d. Nov. 12, 1847, a. 45. ^ 
Susanna Bishop m. David Norton, 1767. 
Ephraim Bissel and Abigail [Curtis? from 

Tolland]: 

2. Thomas, b. Nov. 13, 1739. 

Ephraim Bissell [b. 1736], s. of Eph., 
dec'd, ni. Susanna Warner, d. of Sam., 
Nov. 5, 1756. He d. Sept. 17, 1760, and 
Susanna m. Abiel Roberts, 1771. 

1. Eunice, b Oct. 26, 1757; m. R. Webb. 

2. Daniel, b. Mch. 8, 1759. 

Garry Bissell, s. of Hiram, m. Sarah 
Maria Hull, d. of Elias, in Litchfield, 
June 20, I S3 1. 

1. Sarah Jane, b. Nov 24, 183:;; d. Mch. 21, 1834. 

2. Mary Eliza, b. Jan. 29, 1835; d. June 12, 1837. 

3. Lucy Maria, b. Oct. 26, 1836. 

4. Augusta Louiza, b. Sept. 21, 1838; d. Oct. 4, 1839. 

5. Elizabeth Ann, b. Oct. 29, 1840. (These b. in 

Litchfield.) 

6. Hiram Elias, b. July 15, 1843. 

7. Charles Henry, b. Apr. 25, 1846. 



Blackman. Blakeslee. 

Charles Adams Blackman of Walling- 

ford m. Lorinda Janes, July 8, 1832. 

Irena Blackman m. Alfred Piatt, 1814. 

Samuel G. Blackman [s. of Samuel C. of 
Newtown], m. Charlotte A. Field [d. 
of Dr. Edward], Feb. 25, 1851. 

Sarah M. Blackman m. John Simjison, 
1S51. 

Esther Blake m. Amos Garnsey, 1756. 

Joseph Blake and Rebecca: 

4. Freelove, b. Aug. 11, 1751. 

Seth Blake m. Ame Wetmore, June 20, 
1769.3 

Chloe, b. Nov. 24, 1769. 
Joseph, b. Oct. 29, 1771. 
Esther, b. Feb. 24, 1775. 
A dau. b. Sept 25, 1776. 

Abner Blakslee, s. of Jacob, m. Thank- 
ful Peck, d. of Samuel, Sej^t. 25, 1755. 

1. Samuel, b. Nov. 22, 1756. 

2. Jacob, b. Sept. 14, 1758. 

3. A son, d. soon after lurth, Sept. 4, 1761. 

4. Clement, b. June 30, 1763. 

5. Micajah, b. Apr. 22, 1766. 

6. Zilja, b. July 9, 1768. 

7. Abner, b. May 21, 1771. 

8. Betsey, b. Dec. 27, 17 — .4 
Q. Thankful, 1j. May 6, 177;. 

Thankfid d. Dec. 15, 1785, and Aljner 
m. wid. Mary Noble, Feb. 19, 1786. 



10. Sally, b. Nov. o, 1786. 

11. Jacob Nash, b.'Mch. .1 



17SU 



Adna Blakeslee m. Hannah Graves, Oct. 
II, 1786. •' 

Amasa Blakeslee, s. of John, m. Esther 
Barker, d. of Usal, Aug. 29, 1771, and 
d. July 31, 17S2. 

1. Miles, b. Feb. 8, 1772. 

2. Lyman, b. Apr. 15, 1774. 

3. Eneas, b. July 13, 1776. 
Amasa, b. Dec. 5, 1782. •' 

Amos Blakeslee m. , Nov. 26, 1789.^ 

Amos E. Blakeslee of Springville, Penn., 

m. Jane Bradley, Oct. 5, 1845. 
Angeline Blakeslee m. Chas. Perkins, 

1839. 

Asher Blakeslee [b. May 23, 1738, in 
New Haven], s. of Jacob, m. Mary 
Hum^ston, d. of John of Litchfield, 
Oct. 26, 1762. 

1. Sala, b. Jan. 31, 1764. 

2. Salmon, 1). Jan. 30, 1766. 

3. Anner, b. Nov. 15, 1767. 

4. (lad, I). Jan. 10, 1770. 

5. Asher, b. Nov. 17, 1771. 

Bela Blakeslee m. Olive Brown, May 12, 

I7S5-'' 

Lina, b. Oct. 7, 1786. 
Amanda, b. !\Iay 15, 1789. 

Betty Blakeslee m. Zenas Potter, 1789.^ 



20 Ap 



niSTORT OF WATERS URT. 



Blackslee. Blakslee. 

David Blackslee, s. of Capt. Thomas, m. 

Phebe Todd, d. of Caleb of New Haven, 

Nov. 29, 1743. 

I. Thomas, b. Sept. 17, 1744. 

Phebe d. Oct. 4, 1744, and David m. 
Abigail How, d. of John, May 18, 1752. 
[He d. 17S1; she, 1799.] 
■J. Eli, b. Mch. 22, 1753. 
j. Asa, b. May 23, 1756. 

4. Phebe, b. June 14, 1758. 

5. Ede, b. Oct. 21, 1760; d. Aug. 31, 1771. 

6. liede, b. Nov. g, 1762. 

7. Adna, b. Jan. 31, ij(^^ [d. Aug. 30, 1822]. 

8. David, b. July 22, 1771. 

Deborah Blackslee m. John Alcox. 
Dennis Blakeslee m. Susan E. Cowel, 

Sept. 12, 1S4S. 
Ebenezer Blakslee [b. May 12, 171 1]. s. 

of Eljcnezer, m. Jemima Tuttle, d. of 
William — all of North Haven — May 
17, 1731- 

I. Content, b. Aug. 5, 1732. 

[Ebenezer removed to New Haven 
where were born to him, 1 734-1 753, 
Lydia, Jotham, Seth, Ebenezer, Je- 
mima, Isaiah and Ichabod.] 
Ebenezer Blakeslee and Martha: 

7. Lydia, b. Sept. 6, 1781. 

8. IJenjamin Beach, b. Apr. 15, 1784. 

9. Cloe, b. Dec. 11, 17S6. 
10. Aljel, 1j. Feb. 13, 1790. 

Eli Blakeslee m. Lettice Curtis, Oct. 31, 
1773- 

1. Prue, b. June 25, 1775. 

2. Orpha, 1). Nov. 3, 1776. 

Emily A. Blakeslee m. Edward Nichols, 

1S50. 
Enos Blakeslee d. Feb. 10, 1S12, a. 54.'' 
Esther Blakslee, d. of Thomas, has a son, 

Ira, b. Dec. 8, 1765. 

Esther Blakeslee m. Philip Tompkins, 

1787.^ 
Jacob Blackslee [m. Elizabeth Barnes. 

1. Abner, b. May 15, 1731. 

2. Anne, b. Oct. 6, 1733; ni. Amos Bronson. 

3. Gad, 1). Dfic. 13, 1735; d. May 7, 1767. 

4. Asher, 1). May 23, 1738 — all born in New Haven.] 

5. Noah, b. Dec. 31, 1740. 

6. Sarah, h. Aug. 19, 1743. 

Jacob d. Mch. 25, 1767. Hannah Blacks- 
lee, the mother of Jacob, dyed in Water- 
bury, at .said Blackslee's house, July 23, 
1749, in the 90th year of her age. 

James Blakslee [b. Apr. 27, 1699], s. of 
Sam. [and Sarah Kimberly] of West 
Haven, m. Thankfull Upson, d. of Ser- 
geant Stephen, Sept. 15, 1724, and d. 
June 12, 1784, a. 87. (?) 

1. Kubeu, li. Jan. 18, 1725-6. 

2. Tilly, b. June 10, 1728. 

3. Mehitable, b. Aug. 12, 1732. 

4. James, b. Feb. 5, 1735-6. 



Blakeslee. Blakslee. 

John Blakeslee, s. of Moses, m. Olive 

Curtiss, d. of Samuel, Mch. 4, 1745. 

1. John, b. Mch. 3, 1745-6. 

2. Amasa, b. Jan. 15, 1747-8. 

3. Joel, b. Aug. 19, 1750. 

4. Enos, b. July 12, 1752. 

5. Obed, b. Aug. 29, 1754. 

6. Olive, b. Mch. 29, 1758 [m. EInathan Ives]. 

7. Lettis, b. Apr. i, 1760; d. June 21, 1761. 

8. Lettis, b. May 27, 1763 [ra. Ira Pond]. 

9. Jard, b. July 8, 1765. 

ID. Salla, b. Aug. 20, 1768 [ra. Stephen Seymour]. 

II. Curtis, b. Feb. 16, 1770. 

Jotham Blakeslee, s. of Jotham of North 
Haven, m. Bede Gunn, d. of Nathaniel, 
June 7, 1792. 

1. Ro.xa, b. Feb. 14, 1793. 

2. Lotte, b. June 3, 1795. 

Jude Blakeslee, s. of Abraham, dec'd, of 
New Haven, m. Experience Blakslee, 
d. of Thomas, Nov. 13, 175S. 

1. Ahi, b. Apr. 28, 1759 [m. Jesse Hutniston, and 

d. May 9, 1847]. 

2. Policy, b. Jan. 5, 1761. 

3. Bela, b. Sept. 22, 1762 [d. July, 1825]. 

4. Hannah, b. Apr. 10, 1764. 

5. Micah, b. Sept. 11, 1766. 

6. Esther, b. Oct. 25, 1768. 

7. Betty, b. Dec. 30, 1770. 

8. Levi, b. June 5, 1774; d. Apr. 6, 1775. 

9. Bertha, b. Mch. 26, 1777. ■ v / ^ 
10. Levi, b. Mch. 29, 1779. i.^^CL■^ru^^ 'lA^ dUMjl> ^ 

Laura Blakeslee m. Philo Bronson, 1831. 



Lydia Blakslee m. Amos Prichard, 176S. 

Lydia Blaksley m. Sol. Allin, 1773. 

Maria Blaksley m. Finton Delany, 1S49. 

Mary Blackslee hl Benj. U^json, 1743. 

Micah Blakeslee m. Rhoda Hopkins, 
Dec. 27, I7S9.-* 

Moses Blackslee, s. of Thomas, m. Mehit- 
able Allyn, d. of Gideon, Nov. 17, 1746. 

1. Hezekiah, b. Jan. 27, 1747-8. 

2. Keziah, b. Sept. 20, 1749; d. Feb., 1755. 

3. Amos, b. Jan. 10, 1752; d. July, 1755. 

4. Mary, b. Feb. 20, 1754. 

5. Keziah, b. Mch. 21, 1756. 

6. Rachel, b. Mch. 31, 1758. 

7. Vodice, b. and d. July, 1760. 

8. Vodice, b. Sept. 8, 1761. 

9. .Amos, b. Nov. 26, 1763. 

10. Zaar, b. Feb. 13, 1766; d. Feb., 1768. 

11. Orace, b. July 21, 1768. 

Moses Blakslee, s. of Moses, m. Han- 
nah Dunbar, d. of of Wallingford, 

Sept. 24, 1753. 

1. Asa, b. Sept. 30, 1754. 

2. Caleb, 1). Oct. 12, 1756; d. Apr., 1757. 

3. A dau., b. Apr. i, 1758. 

4. .Moses, b. May 21, 1760. 

Nans Blakley of New Haven m. Mary 
Dudley, June 16, 1829. 

Noah Blakeslee m. wid. Annis Curtis, 
Mch. 21, 1771. 

I. Sarah, b. Jan. 11, 1772. 

Patience Blakslee m. Jesse Alcox, 1763. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



Ap21 



Blakslee. Blakslee. 

Phebe Blakslee m. Eben. Cook, 1744. - 
Phebe Blakeslee m. Dan. Harrison, 1774. 
Phebe Blakeslee m. Jesse Fenn, 1782. ■= 

Ruben Blackslee, s. of Capt. Thomas, 
m. Wary Ford, d. of Barnabas, Sept. 
19, 1748. 

1. Ruth, b. Fel). 4, 1748-9. 

2. Submit, b. Feb. 24, 1750-1. 

3. Silas, b. Nov. 30, 1752. 

4. Enos, b. May 11, 1755. 

5. Lois, b. Oct. 30, 1757. 

6. Eunice, b. Feb. 14, 1760. 

Reuben Blaksle [s. of James] and Rhodah 
[Griswold. He d. Jan. 4, 1813.] 

1. Reubin, b. June 7, 1763. 

2. INIehital^eli, b. June 29, 1765; m. Seldon Scovill. 

3. Louisuanna, b. Jan. 2'6, 1768; m. Rich. Nichols. 

4. Rhoda, b. Jan. 11, 1771. 

5. Samuell, b. July 8, 1773. 

6. James, b. May 6, 1775. 

7. Griswold, b. Apr. 22, 1777. 

Salmon Blakeslee ra. Asenath Blakeslee, 
Oct. II, 1787.^ 

I. Chloe, b. May iS, 1789. 

Samuel Blakeslee:* 

Jacob, b. Mch. 17, 1780. 

Betsey, b. Nov. 2, 1782. 

Jesse, b. Jan. 22, 1785; d. Mch. 2», 1789. 

Austin, b. Oct. 22, 1787. 

Olive, b. May i, 1789. 

Sarah Blakeslee m. James Smith, 1789.'* 

Stephen Blakslee, s. of Abraham of New 
Haven, m. Lida Blakslee, d. of Capt. 
Thomas, Jan. 11, 1758. 

1. Levi, b. Dec. 6, 175S. 

Lydia d. Aug. 23, 1766, and Stephen m. 
Rachel Allin, Nov. 25, 1766. He d. 
Mch. 20, 1768. 

Susanna Blakslee m. B. H. Doolittle, 

1785- ■ 
Wid. Temperance Blakeslee m. Eliakim 

Potter, 1777.'^ 

Cynthia Blakeslee, b. Feb. 17, 1775. 

Thomas Blakslee [s. of Ebenezer of 
North Haven] and Mary: 

[i. David, b. Nov. 7, 1722. 

2. Reuben, b. Mch. ig, 1724-5. 

3. Moses, b. June 30, 1727. 

4. Mary, b. Sept. 7, 1729; d. Dec. 2, 1750. 

5. Submit, b. 1732; d. June 17, 1750— all born in 

New Haven.] 
^6. Experience, b. Jan. 3, 1734-5; '"■ J"''^ Blakeslee. 

7. Lydea, b. July 6, 1737; m. Stephen Blakeslee. 

8. Esther, b. Aug. 6, 1739. 

9. Abigail, b. Dec. 22, 1741; m. Jacob Potter. 

Thomas Blakslee, Jr., s. of David, m. 
Lydia Bradley, Aug. 14, 1764. 

1. Asenath, b. Mch. 8, 1765. 

2. Bethiah, b. Mch. 30, 1767; m. Eli Barnes. 

3. Cloe, b. Feb. 13, 1769. 

4. Mabel, b. Mch. 30, 1771. 



Blakslee. Boughton. 

Tille Blakslee, s. of James, m. Hannah 

Allyn, d. of Ebenezer, dec'd, of New 
Haven, Apr. 24, 1751. 

1. Archibald, b. Aug. 14, 1752. 

2. Thankfull, b. Sept, 17, 1755. 

Diantha Bliss m. David Thompson, 1S2S. 
Lucinda Beak m. Bur. Chatfield, 1S32. 

Henry Book (Boaks) m. Hannah Wil- 
liams, d. of Thomas of Watertown, 
Aug. 18, 17S9. 

Henry Boax of Sheffield m. Maria Leo- 
nard, Oct. 24, 1S36. 

Sarah Boardman ni. James Williams, 
1776. 

Theodore Bocemsdes m. Emerit Adams, 
July 20. 1S35. 

Thomas Bokamds m. Bridget Kelly, 
Mch. 14, 1851.^ 

Hannah Bodine m. J. R. Benham, 1S34. 

Bethollomi Bolt [and Lois Porter]. 

Timothy, bap. Jan. 29, 1769.2 

Levi Bolster from Bangor, Me., m.Mercia 
Warner, d. of Ard., May 5, 1S36. 

1. Elwin Horatio, b. Nov. 8, 1836. 

2. Edwin Levi, b. Aug. 20, 1838. 

3. Juliette, b. Aug. 2, 1840. 

4. Horatio Abram, b. Jan. 27, 1843. 

5. Jane Elizal.ieth, b. Feb. 21, 1845. 

William C. Boon, b. at Norwich, Aug. 8, 
1S07, m. May 18, 1829, Lovisa Hanks, 
b. at Mansfield, Jan. 6, 1806. 

1. Tulia M., b. at Windham, June 28, 1830. 

2. Harriet E., b. at Windham, Apr. 24, 1832. 

3. Dewitt H., b. at Windham, June 12, 1834. 

4. Allen Foster, 1 

and yh. at Meriden, Nov. i, 1838. 

5. Edward Payson, ) 

John C. Booth, s. of Philo of Newtown, 
m. Eunice Tucker of Ox., Feb. 19, 1840. 

I. Sarah Henrietta, b. Apr. 22, 1846. 

Julia Booth m. E. D. Houghton, 183O. 

Abigail Bostwick m. Jas. Wright, 1781.-* 

Andrew Bostick m. Abigail Wclton, d. 
of Peter, Mch. 8, 1775. 

1. Isaac, b. Mch. 6, 1776. 

2. Andrew, b. Oct. 22, 1778. 

Eliza J. Botsford m. J. S. Lsbell, 1837. 

Henry C. Botsford of Whitneyville m. 
Caroline AVarner, Aug. 17, 1851. 

Clarissa Bouton m. Hershel Stevens, 1S21. 

Cynthia Boughton m. .S S. Hartshorn, 

1836. 
Isaac Boughton, s. of Jonas, m. Caroline 

Upson, d. of Obad., May 15, 1833. 

1. George Arnold, b. Nov. 7, 1835. 

2. Susan Maria, b. Mch. 23, 1837. 

3. Henry Isaac, b. Apr. 11, 1S41. 

4. Isabel, b. May 7, 1843. 

5. Elizabeth C, b. Feb. 27, 1846. 



22 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



BouGHTON. Bradley. 

James Houghton m. Alvira Bunnell, Aue 

25, 1S22. ^ 

James Boughton, b. in 1799, s. of John of 
Naugatuc, m. Aug. 10, 1S42, Sally 
Bradley, b. in 1S25, d. of Heman o'f 
Wolcott, and d. Jan., 1S43. 

I. Joseph, li. Apr. 28, 1843. 

Jonas Boughton from Norwalk, b. Oct. 
7, 1779. and Lydia Hine from North 
Milford, b. Nov., 1778, were m. Apr , 
179S. 

1. Charles, b. Sept. 30, 1799. 

2. Louisa, b. Sept. 10, 1801; m. W. H. Orton 

3. Jonas, b. Feb. 13, 1804. 

4. John, b. April i, 1S06, 

5. Isaac, 1j. July 15, 1808. 

6. Susan, b. Feb. 11, 1811. 

7. Lydia Ann, b. Mch. 12, 1S14; m. R. S. Smith. 

8. George, b. June 30, 1816. 

9. Sarah ]\r., b. June 10, 1819; d. Apr. i, 1820 

10. Betsey Jane, b. June 11, 1823; d. July 24, 1S27. 

Laura Bouton m, Lewis Stebbins, i8iS. 
Lettice Bouden (?) : 

Lemuel, bap. Aijr. 18, 1779.'- 

Martin Boughton m. Rosanah Curtis 
Oct. 17, 1S30. 

Olive Bouton m. L. M. Judd, 1S26. 

Silas Bouton m. Julia A. Hotchkiss— all 

of Salem — Oct. 12, 1823. 
John Bourk m. Mary Cannon— both of 

Humphreysville — Feb. 2, 1851. 
James Bowe m, Mary Kelly, July 4, 1S51. 
" Daniel Boice and Mary Heath, m. in 

England. 

Daniel, b. in May. 
James, b, in November. 

No record and a poor memory by the 

mother."* 

Daniel d. Nov. 12, 1847, a. 69.- 

Mrs. Thomas Boyce d. Mch. 7, 1843. a. 
24.-^ 

Thomas "Boys" m. Susanna Fairclough, 
Pel). iS, 1S44. 

David Boyden from Mass., b. Felx 14, 
1791, m. Lucy Ann Scott, d. of Joel^ 
May 4, 1823. 

1. Alonzo, b. Mch. 7, 1825. 

2. Harriet Maria, b. Oct. 6, 1828; m. F. A. Welton. 

3. Hester, b. Mch. 26, 1833. 

Electa Brace m. Chas. Hotchkiss, 1833. 
Bracket, Jtv Brocket. 
Alatheah Bradley m, Abner Scott, 1783. 
Aner Bradley m. Anna Guernsey, d. of 
Joseph, May 12, 1778.-^ 

1. Marcus, b. Apr. 10, 1779. 

2. Anna, b. Sept. 14, 1781. 

3. Hulda, b. May i, 1783. 

4. Aner, b. Jan. 6, 1786. 

5. Harriet, b. June 6, 1788. 



Bradley. Brocket, 

Aner Bradley, Jr. (grandson of above) 

m. Harriet M. Pierpont, Oct. 9, 1848.1' 

Ebenezer Bradley, Jr., m, Mehitable 
Castle, Aug, 12, 1765, 

I. Jared, b. Jan. 27, 1766. 

Elizabeth Bradley m. Gad Smith, 1764. 
Frederick Bradley of New Haven m. 

[Lydia] Maria Bronson, Sept. 19, 1S30. 
Jane Bradley m. A. E. Blakesley, 1845. 
John E. Bradley, s, of Enos, m. Caroline 

Newton, d. of Nathl., dec'd, Jan. 1,1824. 

John L. Bradley m. Harriet Bunnell of 
Woodbridge, Nov. 18, 1830, 

Jonathan Bradley of Middlebury m. 
Phebe Lewis, d. of Ansel, Oct, 3, 1828. 
Luania Bradley m. L. S. Norton, 1833.^ 

Luther Bradley, h. Aug. 14, 181 1. s. of 
Stephen of Prospect, m. Nancy Austin, 
d.of Orrin, Oct. 23, 1833. 

1. Margarett Augusta, b. Sept. 23, 1834. 

2. Julia Maria, b. July 26, 1843. 

Lydia Bradley m. Th. Blakeslee, Jr,, 

1764. 

Lyman Bradley, b. May 22, 1798, s. of 
Enos, m. Hannah P. Leavenworth, d. 
of Joseph, Jan. 30, 1820. 

1. Jane, b. May 21, 1821. 

2. Samuel Eh, li. Aug. 30, 1S23. 

3. Franklin Elliot, b. June 26, 1830; d. Oct. 25, 1840. 

Miriam Bradley m. Abishai Castle, 1760. 

Polly R. Bradley m. C. E. Gaylord, 1831. 

Sally Bradley, d. of Heman of Wolcott, 
b. in 1S25, 

1. A child by Roliert Andrews, name Alize Eliza- 

beth, b. Sept., 1840. 

Sally m. James Bouton, 1842. 

2. Joseph, b. Jan., 1843. 

3. A child by Hosea Munson, b. May 14, 1845. 

Sophia Bradley m. H. C. Welton, 1823. 
Ann Brewster m. Dan. Welton, 1755. 

Beri S. Bristol m, Ellen L, Hull, Aug. 

31, 1S47. 
Esther Bristol m. Russell Beebe, 1788.'' 
Kiel Bristol m. Chastina Potter [d. of 

Aaron], Aug. 9, 1825, 

Miranda Bristol d. Dec. 25, 1809, a. 29. » 

Abigail Brocket m, Caleb Munson, and 
Isaac P>ronson, 1750. 

Alfred Bracket m. Mrs. Sally Cande, 
Apr. 25, 1830. 

Ann Brocket m. Gideon Hotchkiss, 1737, 



* This explanation made on the margin by S, B. Minor. 
t " First marriage celebrated in the new (EoiscoDal) chu 



new (Episcopal) church. J. L. Clark." 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP23 



Brockett. Bronson. 

Asahel Brockett, s. of Peter, m. Clarissa 

Goodrich from near Hamden, Mch., 

1842. 

1. Augusta, b. June, 1843. 

2. Frances, b. May, 184s. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Mch., 1847. 

Benjamin Brocket, b. Nov. 22, 1763, was 
m. to Rebeckah Matthews, b. j\Iay 2, 
lyfjS, by Rev. Mr. Beebe of Wood- 
bridge, Aug. 9, 1791. 

Harriet Brocket m. Sam. Peck. 1822. 

Lydia Bracket m. Smith Miller, 1825. 

Mary Bracket m. Isaac Bronson, 1755- 

Peter Brockett, s. of Zenas, m. Oct. 6, 
1S12, Pamelia Brown, b. Sept. 22, 1794, 
d. of Reuben. 

1. Asahel, b. Aug. 12, 1813. 

2. Mary, ) 

and Vb. Nov. 28, 1815. 

3. Maria, ) 

4. Sally, b. Oct. 28, 1817. 

5. Rachel, b. July 26, 1820; d. Feb. 5, 1838. 

6. Reuben, b. Apr. 5, 1823; d. Aug. 9, 1825. 

7. Jesse, 1j. Feb. 19, 1825. 

8. Ransom, b. July 3, 1827; d. Mch. 15, 1831. 

9. Amelia, h. Nov. 12, 1829. 

10. James Ransom, b. July 3, 1832. 

11. Lucretia, b. June 11, 1837; d. June 28, 1841. 

Polly Brocket m. Samuel Hill, 1807. 
Sarah Brocket m. James Bronson, 1750. 
Zenas Brackits [and Abigail Johnson] : 

1. Cloe, 1). July 15, 1781. 

2. Anna, b. June 3, 1783; m. Benj. Farrel. 

3. Peter, b. Sept. 17, 1784. 

4. Abigail, b. Jan. 21; d. Sept. 16, 1787. 

5. Abigail, b. July i, 1788. 

6. Rebecka, b. Apr. 30, 1790; m. Loveland Judd, 

1812. 

7. Rhoda, b. Sept. 24, 1792; m. Jesse Wooster. 

8. Zenas, h. Apr. 28; d. May 14, 1794. 

Abel Bronson, s. of Lieut. Josiah, m. 
Lydia Benham, Dec. 15, 176S. 

1. Sarah, b. June 2, 1771. 

2. Abel Ijlakeslee, b. Oct. i, 1775. 

Lydia d. June 6, 1782, and Dr. Abel m. 
Esther Hawkins, Oct. 24, 17S4. He d. 
Aug. 2, 1805; she, June, 1823. 

3. A son, b. Feb. 2; d. Feb. 3, 1786. 

4. Lydia, b. IMch. 21, 1787. 

5. Elvira, b. Aug. 25, 1789. 

6. Sarah, b. Apr. i, 1791. 

7. Joseph Perry, b. Sept. 25, 1794. 

8. Homer, b. ^Ich. 20, 1796. 

Abigail Bronson m. R. S. Seymour, 1S28. 

Amanda M. Bronson m. Thomas Towns- 
end, 1S35. 

Amasa Bronson (or Amzi), s. of Ebenezer, 
m. Sarah Frost, d. of Samuel, Jr., Mch. 
31, 1789(8?). 

1. Lucina, b. Dec. 21, 1789. 

2. Billy Au.gusta, b. Nov. 14, 1791; d. Jan. 14, 1794. 

3. Philamelia, b. Jan. 21, 1794. 

4. Billy Augustus, b. June 14, 1796. 

5. Samuel Marshall, b. Jan. 2, 1800. 

6. Julius Gustavus, b. Dec. 21, 1801. 

7. Sarah, b. Feb. 22, 1S05. 



Bronson. Bronson. 

[Amasa d. at his son's in Orange, Ct., 
Mch. 28, 1866, a. 100-11-16,] 

[Capt.] Amos Bronson, s. of John, m. 
Anna Blackslee, d. of Jacob, June 3, 
1751- 

1. Luce, b. Nov. i, 175Z; m. Isaac Barnes. 

2. Phebe, b. ^Ich. 30, 1754 [m. Joash Seymour]. 

3. Tamer, b. Feb. i, 1756; d. May 24, 1759. 

4. Zerah, b. Jan. 22, 1758; m. Aaron Welton. 

5. Silvah, b. Feb. 3, 1760; d. Mch. 21, 1776. 

6. TUle (Tillotson), b. Jan. 8, 1762. 

7. Noah, b. Aug. 6, 1764; d. Mch. !:1, 1766. 

8. Noah Miles, b. July 15, 1767. 

9. Amos, b. Sept. 3, 1769. 

10. Annah, b. June 20, 1773 [m. J. C. Alcox]. 

11. Sarah, b. Nov. 3, 1774. 

12. Silva, b. Nov. 22, 1776. 

[Anna d. Dec, 1800, and Amos m. 
Sarah Frost, Apr. 14, 1S02. He d. 
Sept., 1819.] 
Amos Westly Bronson, b. Feb. 24, 1S07, 
s. of Joseph of Prospect, m. Sept. 9, 
1827, Amanda Warner, b. Nov. 19, 
1804, d. of Jared. He d. [Mch. lo, 1S35.] 

I. Mary Jane, li. May 26, 1830; m. Caleb Granniss. 

[Deac] Andrew Bronson, s. of Ebenezer, 
m. Mary Scovill, d. of Lieut. John, 
Feb. 19, 1745-6. 

1. Amasa, b. June 8, 1746; d. April i, 1752. 

2. Esther, b. Jan. 21, 1747-8; m. Daniel Bronson. 

3. Amasa, b. Apr. i, 1751; d. July 9, 1753. 

4. Mary, b. Apr. 23; d. May 13, 1752. 

5. Thankfull, b. Aug. 27, 1755. 

6. Luce, b. June 27, 1760; m. Samuel Porter. 

7. Samuel, b. Nov. i, 1762 [m. Phebe Hull]. 

8. Silve, b. Nov. 20, 1764. 

[Mary, m. Ezekiel Upson. Andrew, m. 
Silvia Hikcox and d. childless.] 

Anson Bronson, b. Oct. 17, 1795, s. of 
Philenor, m. Laura Hickox, d. of 
Timothy, Feb. 4, 1816. 

1. Sarah Jane, b. Sept. 26, 1817; m. L. L. Trum- 

bull. 

2. William Spencer, b. Mch. 24, 1819. 

3. Nelson, b. Nov. 14, 1821. 

4. Mary Sophrona, b. Sept. 15, 182S; d. Apr. 12, 

1S30. 

Asa Bronson, s. of Deac. Daniel, m. 
Mch., 1S13, Ruth Prindle, Ix Sept. 29, 
17S5, d. of David of Watertown. She 
d. June 17, 1846. 

1. Andrevp Hasket, b. July 20, 1815. 

2. Minerva Jane, b. Apr. 13, 1817; d. Mch. 7, 1843. 

3. Julia Rebecca, b. Apr. 14, 1819; d. Feb. 11, 1837. 

4. Mary Jane, b. Aug. 10, 1821. 

5. Henry Prindle, b. Nov. 6, 1823. 

6- Sarah Whitmore, b. Jan. 8, 1826; d. Jan. 26, 

1847. 
7. Frederic, b. May 29, 1828. 

Asahel Bronson, s. of James, was m. to 
Esther Upson, d. of Stephen, Esq., 
dec'd, Feb. 12, 17S4, by Sam. Lewis, 
Esq. 

1. Sally, b. Dec. i, 1784; m. D. Tyler. 

2. William, b. Mch. 27, 1787 [m. Almira Tyler, d. 

of Roswell]. 



24 Ai' 



niSTORY OF WATERS UBY. 



Bronson. Bronson. 

Aurelia Bronson m. Ransom Mix, i8ig. 

Belinda Bronson m. Sam. Atkins, 1824. 

Benjamin Bronson, s. of John [of Isaac], 
m. Lois Richards, d. of Thomas, dec'd, 
Mch. 14, 1738. He d. Nov. 16, 1745, 
and Lois m. Silas Hotchkiss, 1748. 

1. Hannah, b. Nov. i6; d. Nov. 28, 1738. 

2. Ruth, b. Sept. 30, 1739; m. Samuel Scovill. 

3. Cloe, b. Dec. 2,1741; d. Jan. 16, 1741-2. 

4. Samuel, b. Dec. 10, 1742. 

5. Benjamin, b. May 8, 1746; d. Dec. 22, 1765. 

Benjamin Bronson :^ 

Robert Hotchkiss, Samuel Cook, and Gustavus 

Spencer, bap. Feb. 11, 1810. 
Susan, bap. Sept. 16, 1810. 

Benjamin and Pamela: 

Nancy, bap. Feb. 11, 1S21. 

Bennet Bronson, s. of Stephen, m. Anna 
Smith, d. of Richard of Roxbury, May 
II, 1801. 

1. George, b. Feb. 27, 1802; d. July 21, 1S22. 

2. Henry, b. Jan. 30, 1804. 

3. Jesse, b. Feb. 8, 1806; d. Apr. 14, 1831. 

4. Thomas, b. Jan. 4, 1808. 

5. Elizabeth Anna, b. Mch. 3, 1812; d. Apr. 6, 1845. 

6. Su.sanna, b. Feb. 26; d. Aug. 12, 1814. 

7. Harriet Maria, b. Sept. 13, 1815; m. Zinah Mur- 

dock. 

Anna, wife of Bennet, d. Mar. 4, 1S19 
[about sunset], and he m. his second 
wife, Elizabeth Maltby, d. of Benjamin 
of Branford, May 6, 1820. 

8. Rebecca Tainter, b. Feb. 10, 1822; m. D. F. 

Maltby. 

9. Susan, b. Jan. 19, 1S24. 

Elizabeth d. June 12, 1840 [on Friday 
morning, at 6.45 o'c, and Bennet m. 
Nancy Daggett, d. of Jacob of New 
Haven, May 27, 1S41. He d. Dec. 11, 
1850, at 9 A. M.; she d. at New Haven, 
Aug. 14, 1867].* 

Betsey D. Bronson m. Gains Hitchcock, 
1S33. 

Charles Bronson, s. of Philenor, m. Falla 
Roberts from Bristol, May 16, 1836. 

1. Lucinda, b. July 16, 1837. 

2. Helen Almina, b. Feb. 26, 1839. 

3. .McKendry Whiting, b. Nov. 27, 1840. 

[Deac] Daniel Bronson, s. of Thomas, 
dec'd, m. Esther Bronson, d. of Deac. 
Andrew, July 19, 1770. He d. Nov. 2, 
1824, and she, June 24, 1819. 

1. Leva, b. May 25, 1771; d. Jan., 1775. 

2. Noah, b. Sept. 9, 1773. 

3. Asa, b. Nov. 8, 1775; d. Feb. 29, 1780 [drowned 

in the Great Brook]. 

4. Leva, b. .Apr. 19, 1778; d. June 21, 1800. 



5. Belinda, b. May 21, 1780; d. July 21, 1798. 

6. J Twins, died in one hour after birth, Nov. g, 
7. 1 1782. 

8. Esther, b. Apr. 25, 1784 [m. Wm. Comes] . 

9. Orre, b. June g, 1786 [m. Philander Porter, and 

d. Jan. II, 1836]. 

10. Asa, b. Sept. 8, 1788. 

11. Andrew, b. Dec. 14, 1791; d. Oct. 28, 1792. 



Bronson. Bronson. 

David Bronson, s. of Josiah, m. Anna 
Porter, d. of Dr. Daniel, dec'd, Mch. i, 
1772. He d. July 23, 1799, and .she, 
Nov. 16, 1814. 

1. Hannah, b. Nov. 10, 1774 [m. Ezekiel Stone]. 

2. David, b. Feb. 3, 1777 [m. Elizabeth Esterbrook, 

and d. Mch. 16, 1831]. 

3. Anna, b. Nov. 3, 1778 [m, Zerah Brown]. 

Delight Bronson m. A. F. Woodin, 1S42. 

Ebenezer Brunsen, s. of Isaac, Sen''., m. 
Mary Hull, d. of doctor Benjamin Hull 
of Wallingford, in November the 7, 
1716. 

1. A dafter Susannah, b. Apr. 29, 1718; m. William 

Adams. 

2. A sun Andru, b. Nov. 23, 1720. 

3. INIary, b. Oct. 11, 1723; m. Jon. Baldwin. 

4. Samuel, b. Mch. 16, 1726; d. Nov. 14, 1736. 

5. Ebenezer, b. Oct. g, 1730; d. Dec. 19, 1736. 

6. Thankfull, b. Oct. 15, 1733; d. Dec. 8, 1750. 

Ebenezer m. his second wife, Susanna 
Lancton, d. of Joseph of Farmington, 
July I, 1736. He d. Apr. 11, 1768; she, 
July 20, 1775. 

7. Ebenezer, b. Feb. i, 1737-8. 

Ebenezer Bronson, s. of Ebenezer 
(above), m. Miriam Nichols, d. of 
Richard, Apr. 7, 1763, and d. May 6, 
1S08. [She d. July 12, 1812, a. 71.] 

1. Joseph, b. Mch. i, 1764. 

2. Amzi (bap. as Amasa), b. Apr. 12, 1765. 

3. Sarah, b. Nov. 27, 1766; d. Jan., 1767. 

4. Sarah, b. Dec. 16, 1767. 

5. Susa, b. May 7, 1769; d. Nov. 24, 1782. 

6. Ebenezer, b. Nov. 14, 1771 [m. Hepsibah Har- 

rison, 1800, and d. 1840]. 

7. Harvey, b. Feb. 21, 1774 [m. Fanny Munson] . 

8. Clarissa, | d. .Aug., 1778. 

9. Clarinda, I [m. Jon. Welton,and d. a. 102.] 

and ^b. Apr. 18, 1778. 

10. Isaac, J [m. Anna Smith.] 

11. Susa, b. Feb. 14, 1784. 

(.A.11 these, except Claris.sa, lived over 80 years.) 

Eli Bronson, s. of Isaac, m. Mehitable 
Atwater, d. of Capt. Eneas of Walling- 
ford, Mch. 4, 1773. 

1. Enos, b. Mch. 31, 1774 [m. a dau. of Bishop 

White of Philadelphia, and d. 1823]. 

2. Mehitable, b. Nov. 29, 1775; d. Aug. 31, 1777. 

3. Mehitable, b. May 7, 1778. 

4. Diana, b. Apr. it, 1780. 

5. Philo, b. May 15, 1782 [m. Chloe Bronson]. 

Elijah Bronson, s. of Lieut. Josiah. m. 
Lois Bunnell, d. of Stephen of Wal- 
lingford, Mch. 10, 177S. 

1. Lucy, b. Sept. 3, 1778. 

2. Giles, b. Fel). 13, 1780. 
[3. Irene, b. May 28, 1782. 

4. Sabra, b. Mcli. g, 1784. 

5. Selah, b. Feb. 26, 1786. 

6. Silas, b. Feb. 15, 1788. 

7. Elijah, b. Jan. i, I7g4. 

8. Amos, 1). Nov. 23, I7g5. 

9. Polly, b. Dec. 3, 1797.] 

Elizabeth Bronson m. Sam. Stanley, 1702. 



* Hers was one of the latest burials in the Grand Street Cemetery. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP25 



' '754- . . 

6, 1757; ni. William Leaven- 



Bronson. Brunson. 

Elnathan Bronson, s. of Moses, was m. 
to the widow Rachel Hill of New Fair- 
field, by the Rev. Mr. Thomas Lewis, 
Dec. 26, 1744. 

1. Jesse, b. Sept. ir, 1745. 

2. Esther, b. Sept. 22, 1747. 

3. Jeriisha, b. Jan. 15, 1749-50. 

4. Hannah, b. P'eb 29, 1751-2. 

5. Joseph, b. Dec. 3, 1753. 

Ellen Bronson m. Chas. Cowell, 1S51. 

Emily Bronson m. Divine Piatt, 1S30. 

Ethel Bronson, s. of Capt. Isaac, m. 
Hepsibah Hopkins, d. of Joseph, Esq., 
Dec. 30, 17S7 [and d. 1S25J. 

>• Twins, b. and d. Sept. 11, 1790. 

Alfred, b. Oct. 13, 17911 d. Apr. 6, 1792. 
Erastus, b. Feb. 18, 1793. 
Betsey, b. May 6, 1795. 
Emma, b. Sept. 7, 1797. 
7. Isaac, b. Aug. la, d. Dec. 31, iSoo. 

Ezra Bronson, s. of John, dec'd, m. Su- 
sanna Judd. d. of Thomas, dec'd, Sept. 

6. 1753. [He d. Sept. i, i7<)5; and she, 
Oct. 13. 1S2S.] 

1. Michel, b. Mch. : 

2. Hannah, b. Mch 

worth. 
3 Mark, b. Aug. 4, 1762. 

4. Susanna, b. Kich. 6, 1766 [m. Stephen Welton] . 

5. Anna, h. Dec. 26, 1770; m. Josepfi Cook. 

6. INIeliscent, b. June 27, 1773 [m. Wm. Durand]. 

Harris and Hannah Bronson : 

Charles Hopkins, bap. Apr. 2S, 1S17.I 

Harry Bronson, s. of Joseph, 3d, of Pros- 
pect, m. Charlotte Osborn, d of Daniel, 
2d, of Middlebury, Dec. 15, 1S39, who 
d. July 24, 1S4S, a. 34. 

1. Henry Westly, b. Oct. 6, 1841. 

2. Allice Jennet, b. Mch. 25, 1846. 

Henry Bronson [s. of Bennet, m Sarah 
M. Lathrop, d. of Samuel, June 3, 
1S31]. 

I. Samuel Lathrop, b. Jan. 12, 1S34. 

2- George, b. Sept. 27, 1836; d. Jan. 30, 1837. 

3. Nathan Smith, b. Nov. 20, 1837. 

Henry Bronson m. Chaidotte Thompson, 
Sept. 2, 1S49. 

Huldah Bronson m. David Welton, 1833. 

Isaac Brunson, Senior, and his wife, 
Mary [d. of John Root] His children 
that were born in Waterbury: 

4. Mary, b. Oct. 15, 1680; m. Thomas Hikco.x and 

Deac. Sam. Hull of Woodbury. 

5. Joseph, b. 1682; d. May 10, 1707. 

6. Thomas, b. Jan. 16, 1685-6. 

7. Ebenezer, b. Dec, 1688, 

8. Sarah, b. Nov. 15, 1691; m. Stephen Upson. 

g. Mercy, b. Sept. 29, 1694 [ra. Richard Bronson]. 
[Isaac was b. 1670, John, 1673, and Samuel, 1676, 
in Farmington.] 



Bronson. Bronson. 

Isaac Bronson (2), s. of Isaac, Sen', m. 

Mary Morgan, d. of Richard, Sen'', of 

New London, June 3, 1701. 

1. Jerusha, b. Nov. S, 1703 [m. Paul Welch]. 

2. Isaac, b. Mch. 27, 1707. 

3. Anne, b. Aug. 28, 1709; m. Dan. How. 

4. Josiah, b. June, 1713. 

5. Mary, b. May 29, 1716 |m. J. Hine]. 

6. Nathan, b. Mch'. 29, 1719; d". Dec. 4, 1722. 

7. James, b. Nov. 6, 1721 [d. 1725]. 

8. Patience, b. Apr. 14, 1725; m. Stephen Hopkins. 
g. James, b. Oct. 22, 1727. 

Mary d. Sept. 23, 1749,, and Isaac m. 
Sarah, wid. of Deac. Joseph Lewis, 
May 14, 1750. He d. June 13, 1751, a. 
81. (Her death is recorded with that 
of her first husband.) 

Isaac Bronson (3), s. of Isaac, m. Eunice 
Richards, d. of Thomas, dec'd, July 3, 
1734- 

1. Loise, b. Jan. 26, 1734-5; "i- Isaac Prichard. 

2. Isaac, b. Oct. 2, 1736. 

3. Hannah, d. Jan. 31, 1738-q; m. Timothy Clark. 

4. Lydea, b. June 29, 1741; d. Sept. 10, 1749. 

5. Eli, b. June 30, 1743. 

6. Patience, b. Dec. 12, 1746; d. Aug. 17, 1749. 

7. Seth, b. Dec. 7, 1748. 

Eunice d. Sept. 6, 1749, and Isaac m. 
Abigail [Brocket], wid. of Caleb Mun- 
son of Wallingford, Nov. 22, 1750. [He 
d. Dec. 7, 1799, a, 93.] 

8. Titus, b. Oct. 5, 1751. 

9. Abigail, b. Aug. 12, 1753. 

Isaac Bronson (4), s. of Isaac, m. Mary 
Bracket, d. of Josiah of Wallingford, 
Feb. 13, 1755. He died Apr. 15, 1826, 
a. 90; she d. Aug. i, 1816, a. 76. 

1. Eunice, b. Dec. 4, 1755 [d. 1775]. 

2. Mary, b. Sept. 15, 1757. 

3. Isaac, b. Mch. 10, 1760 fm. Anna Olcott, and d. 

at Greenfield Hill, May 19, 1838]. 

4. Laban, b. Feb. 15, 1762; d. Nov. 28, 1801. 

5. Ethel, b. July 22, 1765. 

6. Chancey, b. the last day of 1767; d. May 16, 

1768. 

7. Hannah, b. May i, 1769; m. Eli Hine. 

8. Sarah, b. Mch. 21, 1775. 

9. Virtue, b. Mch. 22, 1778 [m. Nancy Carrington]. 

Jairus Bronson, s. of Titus, m. Irena 
Mallory, d. of David of Woodbury, 
Jan. II, 1804. 

I. Charles, b. July 5, 1S04. 

James Bronson, s. of Isaac, m. Sarah 
Bracket, d. of Josiah of Wallingford, 
Aug. 22, 1750.. 

1. Roswel, b. Sept. g, 1751. 

2. Sarah, b. Jan. 5. 1754; m. John Adams. 

3. Levy, b. June 12, 1757 [m. Matte .Slaughter]. 

4. Asael, b. Nov. 28, 1759. 

5. Thankful, b. Mch. 5, 1762; m. Amos Hinman. 

6. Jese, b. July i, 1763. 

Jennet Bronson m. Nelson Cowell, 1S36. 
Jerusha Bronson m. Wm. Hickox, 1830. 



26 AP 



BISTORT OF WATERS URY. 



Bkonson. Bronson. 

Jesse Bronson, s. of James, m. Esther 

Osborn, d. of Nathan of AVoodbury, 

Sept. 30, 17S4. 

1. Benoni, b. Mch. i, 1786. 

2. Marshal, b. Nov. 22, 1787. 

3. Alviny, b. Aug. 30, 1789. 

4. Leman, b. Jan. 15, 1792. 

John Bronson, s. of Isaac, m. Mary 
Hikco.x, d. of Samuel and Hanna, in 
Waterbury, Nov. g, 1697. 

1. Mary, b. Apr. 9, 1698; m. Samuel Porter and 

John Barnes. 

2. John, b. Apr. 23, 1701. 

J. Hanna, b. Oct. 31, 1704 [m. Nathan Gaylord]. 

4. Jemima, b. Aug. 27, 1706; m. Stephen Hopkins. 

5. Joseph, b. July 15, 1709. 

6. Benjamin, b. Oct. 2, 1711. 

Mary d. Mch. 21, 1713, and John m. 
Hannah Richards, wid. of Thomas, 
dec'd. scmietime in June, 1727. [He d. 
Jan., 1746-7], and Hannala m. Ebenezer 
Richason, 1749. 

7. Tamer, b. Mch. 14, 1730; m. Jos. Nichols. 

8. Ezra, b. Apr. 24, 1732. 

9. Phebe, b. Mch. 23, 1734; m. Nathaniel Richa- 

son. 

John Brounson, Jr., s. of John, m. Com- 
fort Balding, d. of William of Strat- 
ford, Mch. 2S. 1728. 

1. Rhode, b. Mch. 30, 1729; m. Joshua Graves. 

2. Amoz, h. Feb. 3, 1730-1. 

3. Hannah, b. Mch. 6, 1734, m. David Foot. 

4. Thankful, b. Sept. 6, 1736 [m. INIoses Foot]. 

5. Mary, b. Feb. 25, 1738-9 [m. Aaron Foot, 1760, 

and d. Feb. 10, 1824]. 

6. John, b. Dec. 22, 1742. 

7. Cloe, b. Dec. 29, 1745 [m. Col. Barker of Nine 

Partners, N. Y.] . 

John Bronson:' 

William liradley, bap. Oct. 28, 1821. 

John Bronson's wife, Hannah, d. vSept. 
15, 1842, a. 47. 

Joseph Bronson, s. of John [of Isaac], m. 
Anna Southmayd, d of John, June i, 
1732. 

1. A dau., still-born, Aug. 28, 1733. 

2. Millesent, b. Dec. 24, 1734; d. Mch. 8, 1735. 
j. Eldad, b. July i, 1736; d. Aug. 18, 1749. 

4. Desire, b. July 9, 1738; m. Jon. Guernsey. 

5. Seba, b. Sept. 23, 1740. 

6. A dau., still-born. 
7- " 



7; [still. 



born. 



g. Still-born. 

10. Still-born, and the mother died a few days 
after, Aug. 18, 1749. 

The above-named Anna Southmayd, 
the wife of Josej^h Bronson, d. Aug. 
12. 1749 (still another record says Aug. 
XI); and Joseph m. Mary Fulfofd. d. of 
Lieut. Gershom, May 2, 1750. [He d. 
Sept. 19, 1771; she, Mch. 6, 1812, a. 85.] 

1. Anna, b. May 22, 1751; m. Heman Mimson. 

2. Bela, b. Mch. 7, 1757. 



Bronson. Bronson. 

Joseph Bronson, s. of Ebenezer, ni. Han- 
nah Porter, d. of Dr. Preserved, Dec. 
23, 1784, who d. Sept. 18, 1S39. 

1. Sarah Gould, b. July 21, 1785; d. Feb. 11, 1744 

2. Nancy Fluvia, b. Aug. 13, 1787; m. W. J. Per- 

kins. 

3. Lavinia Porter, b. Sept. 9, 1789. 

4. Cloe, b. Jan. 28, 17Q1. 

5. Preserved Porter, b. May i, 1704. 

[Lieut.] Josiah Bronson, s. of Isaac, m. 
Dinah Sutliff, d. of John, July 23, 1735. 

I. Lucy, b. Sept. 10, 1736; m. James Porter. 

Dinah d. Jan. 10, 1736-7, and Josiah m. 
Sarah Leavenworth, wid. of David of 
Woodbury, May 15, 1740. 

1. David, b. June 25, 1741. 

2. Abel, b. May 30, 1743. 

3. Zuba (Azubah), h. Apr. 28, 1745; m. .Abner 

Munson. 

4. Ruben, b. June 5, 1747. 

5. Thaddeus, b. July 22, 1749. 

6. Josiah, b. Feb. i, 1751-2. 

7. "Elijah, b. May 15, 1755. 

Sarah d. Aug. 28, 1767, and Josiah was 
m. Dec. 23, 1767, to Rebekah Hurlbut, 
relick of Joseph of Woodbury, by 
Thomas Canfield, ?'. ;;/. Rebekah d. 
June 12, 1797, and Josiah m. June 12, 
179S, Mrs. Huldah Williams (called 
Mary on Oxford rec.) [wid. of Samuel?] 
He d. Feb. 20, 1S04, a. 90. 
Josiah Bronson, Jr., s. of Josiah, m. Ta- 
bitha Tuttle, d. of Ezekiel, Jan. 20. 
17S0. 

1. Truman, b. Jan. 5, 1781. 

2. Alvin, b. May 19, 1783. 

3. Josiah, b. Sept. 19, 1786. 

4. Edward, b. Sept. i, 1789. 

5. Nancy, b. Feb. 27, 1793. 

Judson Bronson, s. of Jo.seph, m. Emily 
G. Terrill, d. of Alvin. vSept. 24, or Oct. 
28, 1S27. (Two entries.) 

1. Mary Ellen, b. June 27, 1S29. 

2. Caroline Lavinia, b. Sept. 18, 1831. 

3. Charlotte Ann, b. Dec. 24, 1S34. 

4. Edward Lampson, b. Nov. 24, 1840. 

Emily d. June 7, 1842, and Judson m. 
Sally Ann Perkins, [wid. of Jesse, and] 
d. of Geo. Knowlton, Nov. 23. 1S44. 
Julius G. Bronson, s. of Amasa, m. Julia 
Newton, d. of Nathan, Sept. 9, 1S30. 

1. Samuel Marshall, b. Apr. i, 1832. 

2. Charles Henry, b. Oct. 5, 1835. 

His first wife d. Dec. 15, 1S41, a. 35. 
His second wife, Minerva Newton, sis 
ter to his P. wife, and was widow of 
Joseph S. Leavenworth, b. July 11, 
1S04. They were mar. Feb. 27, 1845. 

A child, b. Mcli. 10, 1S47. 

Levi Bronson, s. of Seba, m. Sarah Prin- 
die, d. of Eieazer of Watertown, j\Iay 
23. 1783 

[His children were: Eieazer, Mary, m. |ared 
Warner, 1803; Olive, Anner, Nancy, Lovisa, 
Chauncey, Anna, Wheeler, and Lovimus.] 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP27 



Bronson. Bronson. 

Lucy Bronson, d. of Deac. Andrew; Re 

cord of her child by Joseph Hopkins, 

Jr., s. of Joseph, Esq. 

Sally, b. June 22, 1784. 

Maria Bronson ni. Fred. Bradley, 1S30. 

Mark Bronson, s. of Ezra, m. Esther 
Hopkins, d. of Joseph, Sept. 16, 17S4 
[and d. 1797. Esther d. 1S14]. 

1. Harry, b. Aug. 4, 1787. 

2. Nancy, b. June 21, 1789; m. Cyrus Clark. 

3. Esther, b. Jan. 28, 1794; d. Jan. ir, 1705. 

4. Edward, bap. May 7, 1707 ("his mother being a 

widow). 

Mary J. Bronson m. Caleb Grannis, 1848. 

Mehitable Bronson m Newton Hine, Jr., 

1S30. 

Mercy Bronson ni. John Judd, 1731. 

[Lieut.] Michael Bronson, s. of Capt. 
Ezra, m Eunice Nichols, d. of Joseph, 
dec'd, July 3, 1776, and d. July 25, 1822. 

1. Clarissa, b. Sept. 30, 1776 [m. Azor Bronson]. 

2. Horatio Gates, b. Oct. 2, 1777; d. Oct. 23, 1825. 

3. Hannah, b. Feb. 12, 1780; m. Joel Scott. 

4. Ezra, b. Dec. 6, 17S3. 

Minerva Bronson m. C. L. English, 1840. 

Moses Bronson, s. of John, dec'd, was 
mar. at Stratford to Jane Wiat, Nov. 6, 
1 712, and d. Aug. 12, 1754. 

1. Unice, b. Dec. 23, 

2. Sarah, b. Sept. 2 

3. Nathan, b. Sept. _ 

4. Martha, b. June 14, 1721. 

5. Elnathan, b. Oct. 2, 1723. 

6. Comfort,) 

and >b. Mch. 29, 1726. 

7. Charity, ) 

S. Esther, b. Feb. 6, 1727-8. 

9. Jerusha, b. Feb. 9, 1729-30; m. Thomas Will- 
iams. 
ID. Jemima, b. May 25, 1732. 

11. William, b. i\Iay 30, 1734. 

12. Moses, b. June ig, 1736. 

13. Naomi, b. Mch. 28, 1739 [ra. Jonathan Hughes]. 

Nancy Bronson m. Shelden Merriam, 
1S21. 

Nathan Bronson, s. of Moses, m. Obe- 
dience Williams, d. of Thomas, dec'd, 
Feb. 22, 1749-50. 

1. Ruben, b. Nov. 28, 1750. 

2. A dau., b. Feb. 17, 1753. 

Obedience d. Mch. 13, i75[3], and Na- 
than m wid. Abigail Lewis, June 29. 
1769. She d. Nov. 17, iSoo, a. 90. 

Noah Bronson, s. of Daniel, m. Huldah 
Sperry, d. of Capt. Jacob, Dec. 28, 1795. 

1. Sally, b. Aug. 11, 1796. 

2. Maria Balinda, b. June 17, 1800 [d. Oct. iS, 

1839]- 

Huldah d. Oct 3, 1829. and Noah m. 
Chloe Peck [d. of Ward], Feb. 16, 
1840. 



1714; m. Eli. Welton. 
1717: m. John Warner. 



Bronson. Bronson. 

Noah Miles Bronson, s. of Capt. Amos, 

m. Betsey Ives, Oct. 5, 1797, and d. in 

Medina, O , a. 92. 

[Emily, b. Oct. 5, 1798; d. Nov. 14, 1800. 
Sherman, b. Oct. 7, 1800. 
Hiram, b. July 28, 1S02.I 

Oliver H. Bronson, b. Jan. 24 1S16, s. of 
Clark of Wolcott, and Eniilv Munson, 
b. Sept. 17, 1822, d. of Medad C. of 
Wallingford, were mar. Nov. 14. 1840. 

I. Henry Trumbull, b. Sept. [18], 1842. 

Philenor Bronson m. Mrs. Sarah Buck- 
ingham of Oxford, Nov. 5, 1837. 

Phtlo Bronson, s. of Philenor, m. Laura 
Blakeslee, d. of Manning of Prospect, 
Sept. 29, I S3 1. 

1. Bennet Augustus, b. Aug. 14', 1832. 

2. William Philander, b. Aug. 25, 1835. 

3. Lucretia Ann, b. July 10, 1837. 

4. Mary Jane, b. Nov. 5, 1841. 

5. Henry Sherman, li. Dec. 25, 1845. 

Pitkin Bronson, b. May 2, 1815 s. of 
John of Wolcott, and Sarah Scoville 
Merriam, b. Aug. 12, 1820, d. of Ches- 
ter of Watertown, were mar. Aug. 5, 

1839- 

1. John Treadwell, b. July 24, 1842. 

2. Edward, b. Apr. 27, 1847. 

Polly Bronson m. Graham Hurd, 1S3S. 

Ralph S. Bronson of Roxbury m. Louisa 

N. Terrill, Nov. 3, 1S50. 
Reuben Bronson, s. of Lieut. Josiah, m. 
Jemiah Porter, d. of Lieut. Samuel, 
Nov. I, 1770. 

1. Edward, b. July 11, 1772; d. Jan. i, 1774. 

2. Samuel, b. Sept. i, 1774. 

Rose! (Roswell) Bronson, s. of James, 
m. Susanna Addams. d. of William, 
Nov. 25, 1773 [and d. Mch., 1836]. 

1. Benoni, b. Sept. 25, 1774; d. Nov. 4, 1777. 

2. Rozvvel, b. Jan. 26, 1777. 

3. Milla, b. Feb. 2, 1779. 

Sally Bronson m. Enoch Piatt, Jr., 1826. 

Sally Bronson m. Richard Sutton, 1S2S. 

Capt. Samuel Bronson [s. of Benj.], m. 
'Temperance Spencer, [d. of Isaac, 
Sen.], May 30, I77r). 

1. Benjamin, b. Mch. 19. 1777. 

2. Samuel, b. Mch. 31, 1779. 

3. Chloe, b. Aug. 5, 1781. 

4. Temperance, b. Mch. 18, 1784. 

Temperance d. July 31, 17S5, and Major 
Samuel m. Huldah Williams [d. of 
Sam.], Dec. 5, 1786. 

5. Isaac, b. Aug. 18; d. Oct. 10, 1787. 

6. Sally, b. Aug. 14, 1791; d. Nov. 15, 179S. 

7. Isaac, b. Sept. 11, 1793. 

8. William, b. June 27; d. Aug. 10, 1795. 
g. John, b. Dec. 29, 1796. 

ir>, Ezra Richards, b. Oct. 10, iSoi; d. Jan. 5, 1805. 

Jan. 12, iSoo, Samuel, Huldah, Samuel 
3d, Chloe and Temperance were admit- 



28 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Bronson. Bronson. 

ted to the church. Same date, Isaac 
and John were bap., also Phebe, one of 
the household of Samuel Bronson.' 

Samuel Bronson, Jr. [s. of Deacon An- 
drew]: 

I. Andrew Hull, b. Feb. i8, 1797. 

Samuel Bronson (called Samuel the 3d), 
s. of Major Samuel, m. Emily Hunt, d. 
of James of New Haven, Mch., 1S03. 
She d. Jan. 5, 1S2S, a. 48. 

1. Sarah, b. Jan., 1806. 

2. Emily, b. July, 1808. 

3. Temperance, b. Jan. 18, 1810; in. Geo. Root. 

Sarah Bronson m. Chas. English, 1S44. 

Seba Bronson, s. of Joseph, m. Mary 
Hikcox, d. of Abraham, July 5, 1764. 
[He d. Jan.; she, July, 1S16.] 

1. Levi, b. June 24, 1765. 

2. Olive, b. July 3, 1766. 

3. Azor, b. Jan. i, 1768. 

4. Joseph, b. June 3, 1769. 

5. Anna, b. Feb. 5, 1771. 

6. Seba, b. Sept. 26, 1772. 

7. Herman, b. Dec. iS, 1774. 

8. Thomas Gage, b. Apr. 19, 1776. 

9. Abraham, b. Apr. 11, 1778. 

10. Mary, b. Mch. 13, 1780; m. Ard Warner. 

11. Bela, b. Apr. 3, 1782. 

Selah Bronson' [and Ann Daily]: 

John Wheton, bap. Oct. 4, 1816. 
Ann; m. W. M. Drake, 1S30. 

[Deac] Seth Bronson, s. of Isaac, m. 
Cloe Prichard, d. of George, Nov. 27, 
1770. [He d. Jan. lO, 1S05, and she, 
Oct. II, 1828.] 

1. Anna, b. June 19, 1773. 

2. Cloe, b. Dec. 28, 1777 [m. David Tyler]. 

3. Jonas, b. Sept. 25, 1779 [m. Melinda Baldwin]. 

4. Markus, b. Sept. 8, 1781 [m. Rebecca Thomp- 

son]. 

Sherman Bronson, b. Jan. 13, 1799, s. of 
Joseph, m. Harriet Scott, d. of Joel, 
1820. 

Jennet Nancy, b. Aug. 16, 1S20. 

Catharine \., b. Jan. 25, 1823; m. ,\. H. Martin. 

Sophia Bronson m. W. S. Smith, 1S37. 

[Deac] Stephen Bronson, s. of Thomas, 
Esq., m. Sarah Humaston, d. of Calel), 
Esq., May 17, 1764 He d. Dec. 15, 
1S09; she, July 27, 1S22. 

1. Mercy, b. Dec. 17, 1764; m. John Kingsbury. 

2. Jesse, b. June 9, 1766; d. Feb. 4, 1788 [of small- 

pox] . 

3. John, b. Aug. 14, 1768; d. Jan. 22, 1782. 

4. Susanna, b. Dec. 26, 1770; d. Oct. 21, 1773. 

5. Content Humaston, b. May 14, 1773; d. Mch. 

28, 1806. 

6. Bennet, b. Nov. 14, 1775. 

7. Susanna, b. Apr. 6, 1780; m. Joseph Burton. 

Susan Bronson m. A. E. Rice, 1S32. 



Bronson. Bronson. 

Thaddeus Bronson, s. of Josiah, m. Abi- 
gail Wilmot, Dec. 10, 1772. 

1. Abigail, b. June lo, 1773 [m, D. Prichard]. 

2. Uri, b. May 30, 1778. 

3. Olive, b. Mch. 17, 1779. 

4. Lucy, b. Mch. 21, 17S1. 

5. Jerusha, b. May 21, 1784. 

6. Jared, b. June 18, 1791. 

7. Ruth, b. Slay 17, 1793. 

Abigail d. May 25, 1793, and Thaddeus 
m. Anne Hitchcock, Jan. 5, 1794. He 
d. Mch. 2, 1S25. 

[Lieut.] Thomas Brounson, s. of Isaac, 

Sen'', m. Elizabeth Upson, d. of Stephen. 
Sen'', Dec. 21, 1709. 

1. Thomas, b. Jan. 5, 1710-11. 

2. Stephen, b. Nov. 25; d. Dec. 30, 1712. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 18, 1714; d. ISIay 24, 1715. 

4. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 24, 1716; m. Eben. Warner. 

The above-named Thomas Brounson, 
husband to the said Elizabeth, d. May 26, 
1777. The above-named Elizabeth, wife 
to the said Thomas, dyed Mch. 30, 1778. 
Thomas Brounson [Esq.], s. of Thomas, 
m. Susanna Southmayd, d. of John, 
Sept. 25, 1734. 

1. Stephen, b. June 30, 1735. 

2. Susanna, b. Dec. 7, 1736 [m. Rev. Elijah Sill|. 

3. Daniel, b. Mch. 8, 1738 g. 

4. Samuel, b. June 21; d. June 30, 1741. 

Susanna d. Aug. 13, 1741, and Thomas, 
s. of Lieut. Thomas, m. Anna Hopkins, 
d. of Stephen, Jan. 9, 1745-6. He d. 
June 25, 1759 [of measles], and she m. 
Phineas Royce. 

5. David, b. Sept. 25, 1748; d. Aug. 10, 1750. 

6. Thomas, b. Rich. 10, 1751. 

7. Anna, b. Sept. 28, 1752; m. Jos. Upson. 

8. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 30, 1755; m. Dr. Roger Conanl 

[and Josiah Hatch]. 

9. Ruth, b. Feb. 23, 1759 [m. Dr. Jesse Upson]. 

Thomas Bronson, Jr. (3), s. of Thomas, 
dec'd, m. Elizabeth Hickcox, d. of 
Capt. Samuel, Aug. 25, 1774. [She d. 
Mch. 15, he, Mch. ib, 1813; and they 
were buried in one grave ] 

I. MoUe, b. Mch. 18, 1775 [m. Dan. Hikco,\]. 

[Thomas Bronson, s. of Bennet, in. Cyn 
thia Elizabeth Bartlett, d. of Cyrus M 
late of Hartford, dec'd,' Feb. 13, 1S39. 
He d. Apr. 20, 1S51, at 11:45 a. m. 

1. Harriet Anna, b. June 2, 1840. 

2. Julius Hobart, b. Apr. 30, 1842. 

3. Edward Bennet, b. June 13, 1S43.J 

Titus Bronson, s. of Isaac [3], m. Hannah 
Cook, d. of Moses, dec'd, Feb. 11, 1779. 
[He d. May 20, 1S20; she, Apr. i, 1S41.] 

1. Jairus, b. Dec. g, 1779. 

2. Horace, b. Feb. 15, 1782. 

3. Augustus, b. June 24, 1784. 

4. Esther, b. Oct. ig, 1786 [m. John Hine]. 

5. Titus, b. Nov. 27, 17S8. 

6. Hannah, b. Apr. 18, 1791. 

7. Sally, b. Sept. 13, 1794 [m. A. Benham]. 

8. Leonard, b. June 24, 1797 [m. Nancy Richard- 

son, wid. of Merrit Piatt]. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP29 



Bronson. Brown. 

Tyler Bronson, see L. S. Beacli. 

Uri Bronson, s. of Thaddeus, ni. Anna 
AUvood, d. of Elijah, Dec. 5, 1799. 

William S. Bronson, s' of Anson, m. 
Diadama Gaylord, b. July S, iSii, d. of 
Seth of Bristol, Mch. 24, 1S41. 

1. Franklin Gaylord, b. Dec. 20, 1844. 

2. Ella Antoinette, b. Jan. 16, 1847. 

Zenas Bronson, b. iSoo. s. of David, and 

Anna M. Chatfield, b. June 25, 1S04 d. 
of Dan., were mar. Dec. 31, 1S2S. He 
d. Oct. 26, 1S34. 

1. Stiles A., b. Feb. 25, 1830; d. Sept. 17, 1S31. 

2. Elizabeth A., b. Mch. 6, 1832. 

3. Enos S., b. Aug. 11, 1834. 

Augusta A. Brooks m. E. J. Barnard, 1643. 

David Brooks m. Amanda Jordon, Feb. 

25, 1S44. 

Deborah Brooks m. Barnabas Lewis, 

1750. 
Elizabeth Brooks m. John Mullings 1S44. 
Enos Andrew Brooks d. ^Mch. 3, 1S34, a. 

5--" 
Hannah Brooks m. John Clark, 1747, and 

Cornelius Graves, 1751. 
Loly Brooks m. Jesse Andrews, 1791. 
Mary Brooks m. G. B. Aldrich, 1S39. 
Nancy Brooks m J. B. Pel ton, 1S47. 
Sarah Brooks m El)en Hoadley, 1S43. 
Mrs. Abner Brown d. Mch. 23, 1S45, a. 53.- 
Anne Brown m. W. R. Judd, 1S21. 
Aseph Brown, s. of Daniel, m Tamer 

Hall, d. of Nathaniel, Aug. i, 17S2. 

1. Ralph, b. Nov. 28, 1782. 

2. Isula, b. Sept. 6, 1784. 

3. Eunice, b. .^ept. 11, 1786. 

4. Lachoa, b. Sept. 2, 1788^ 

Augustus Brown, s. of James, m. Fran- 
ce.s Elizabeth Burton, d. of Joseph, 
Mch. 6, 1S44, who d. Apr. 10, 1S51. 

I. Charles Augustus, b. Jan. 11, 1845. 
[2. Frances Eltzabeth, b. Mch. 23, 1848.] 

Candice Brown m. E. B. Leavenworth, 

I S40. 
Daniel Brown, s. of James, was mar. to 

Sarah Turrill, wid. of John, and d. of 

Nathl. Merrills, by Rev. Air. Richard 

Mansfield. May 20, 1750. 

1. Daniel, b. Apr. 28, 1751 [went to Vermont]. 

2. Sarah, b. Jan. 27, 1753; m. E. Andrews. 

3. David, b. Oct. 23, 1755- 

4. Asaph, b. Sept. 4, 1757. 

5 Silva, b. Feb. 13, 1760 [m. C. Clark and C. 
GriUey]. 

6. Salmon, b. May 9, 1762; d. Apr. 15, 1766. 

7. Elias, b. July 11, 1765 [m. Eunice Hall]. He 

d. July 20, 1844; she, Mch. 4, 1842, a 7Q.''' 

8. Salmon, b. Sept. 28, 1767 [m. Lois Richards]. 
Q. Lydia, b. Feb. 24, 1770 [m. Moses Hall]. 

10. Noah, b. May 24, 1773 [m. Lois Hall]. 



Brown. Brown 

Daniel Brown, Jr.:'- 

Luvina and Denina (?), bap. Oct. 9, 1767. 
Reulien, bap. Apr. 23, 1769. 

Daniel Brow^n, b. June 27, 1S02, s. of 
Reuben, and Betsey Manchester from 
Dover, N. Y., b. June 22, iSoo, were 
mar. in May . 

1. Eliza Ann, j 

and ;-l.). Dec. 19, 1S30. 

2. Jane, ) 

3. Adelia, b. May 17, 1834. 

4. William Henry, b. Mch. 15, 1835. 

Daniel Brown m. Sarah Butler of New 
Haven, Oct. 9, 1S42. 

Ebenezer Brown m. Rebeccah Luding- 
ton, Feb. 2s, 17S1. 

1. Willis, b. Mch. 17, 1783. 

2. Esther, b. Aug. 18, 17S5; d. Sept. 3, 1793. 

5. Rosannah, b. Mch. 11, 1787. 

4. Smith, b. May 13, 1788. 

5. Levi, b. Jan. 27, 1791. 

6. Sally, b. June 26, 1792. 

7. Esther, b. Nov. 30, 1793. 

Elam Brown, s. of James, m. Naomi 
Frost, d. of Samuel, Dec. 27, 1753. 

1. Elam, b. Jan. 17, 1755. 

2. Elizabeth, b. Jan. 16; d. May 23, 1757. 

3. Corneleous, b. Dec. 15, 1761. 

Elizabeth Brown m. Chester Neal, 1S23. 

George W. Brown of Meriden m. Susan 
M. Woodruff, Jan. 31, 1847. 

Giles Brown d. Nov. 24 1S37, a. 76.-' 

Hezekiah Brown, s. of Samuel, m. Rachel 
Prindel, d. of Lieut. Jonathan, Apr. 16, 

175S. 

1. Zere, b. Sept. i8, 1759. 

2. Hannah, b. Jan. 19, 1762; d. June 3, 1781. 

3. Olive, b. Jan. 25, 1764; m. Bela Blakeslee. 

4. Hezekiah, b. Dec'. 16, 1765; d. Mch. 12, 1770. 

5. Jonah, b. Oct. 16, 1767. 

6. Rachel, b. Jan. 14, 1770; m. Pres. Hikco.x. 

7. Joannah, b. Apr. 23, 1774. 

8. William Warner, b. Nov. 10, 1776. 

Isaac Brown, s. of Elias, m. Amanda 
Barnes, d. of Eliphalet of Plymouth, 
Nov. 27, 1S17. He d. Nov. 29, 1S37, a. 
55; she, Sept. 16, 1845, a. 48.'- 

1. Mary Janett, b. Nov. i, 1S18. 

2. David, b. Feb. 11, 1821. 

James Brown (i) and Elizabeth [Kirby] 
of New Haven formerl}'. An account 
or record of their chil. b. in Wat. [He 
d. May 15, 1760, in his 75th year.] 

g. Daniell, b. Nov. 6, 1723. 
10. Rebeckah, b. Sept. 13, 1726; m. J. Warner. 

The 8th child and 4th son, Asa, dyed July 14, 

1733- ^^ 

[Other children were : James, Joseph, Elam, 
Sarah, Elizabeth, who m. \Vm. Scovill, and 
Eunice.] 

James Brown (2), s. of James, m. Han- 
nah Tompkins, d. of Edmund, Dec. 16, 
1744. in the iSth year of King George 
the Second's reign. [He d. 1760, during 



30 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Brown. Brown. 

the French War, at Little Falls, on the 
Mohawk.] 

I. James, b. Dec. o; d. Dec. 26, 1745. 
;;. James, b. Dec. 8, 1746. 

3. Asa, b. Feb. 18, 1748-9. 

4. Ebenezer, b. Dec. 5, 1750; A. Oct. 25, 1751. 

5. Hannah, b. .Aug. 13, 1752. 

6. Ebenezer, b. July 20, 1757 [d. in the Park, Nov. 

13,1844]. 

James Brown (3). s. of James, m. Han- 
nah Culver, d. of David of Farmington, 
Mch. 20. 1770. 

1. James, b. Nov. 26, 1770 [m Lois Warner, and 

had Rev. Harvey, b. Oct. 13, 1793]. 

2. Hannah, b. July 24, 1772. 

Hannah d. May 30, 17S3, and James m. 
Oct. 31, 17S3, Eunice Mallory, d. of 
Thomas of Woodbury. 

3. Levi, b. July 20, 1784; d. Apr. 27, 1785. 

Eunice d. Apr. 15, 1792, and James m. 
[his third wife] Rosanna Perkins, wid. 
I of Edward of Bethany] and d. of Isaac 
Judd, Sept. 13, 1792. 

4. Eunice, b. Mch. 22, 1794. 

5. Erwin (or Arv'n), b. Apr. 6, 1796. 
<■. Appclina, b. Feb. 24, 1709. 

James Brown, Jr., s. of Stephen of Wind- 
sor, m. Lavinia Welton, d. of Levi of 
Wolcott, June 22, iSoi. [He d. Julv 
24; she, Oct. 6, 1S4S.] 

1. Philo, b. Jan. 26, 1803. 

2. William, b. June 15, 1804. 

3. ISLary Ann. b. May 11; d. Oct. 18, 1809. 

4. Augustus, b. Aug. 20, i8n. 

5. James, b. July 2, 1815. 

Jane E. Brown m. Isaac Baldwin, 1S45. 

Jane Brown m. Geo. Benton, 1S50. 

Jesse Brown, s. of Reuben, m. Mary 
Ann. wid. of David Wheeler, and d. of 
Elij^halet Prichard, Sept. 11, 1S25. 

1. William, b. June 29, 1826. 

2. Junius, b. July 28, 1828. 

3. Nancy Maria, b. Oct. 12, 1S30. 

John Brown, s. of Samuel, dec'd, m. 
Anne, d. of Richard Welton, Jr., Dec. 
16, 1747. 

1. Mary, b. Feb. 15, 1749-50; d. May 17. 1750. 

2. Mary, b. Sept. 3, 1751 [m John Clough]. 

3. Anne, b. Oct. 9, 1755 [m. John Fleming, and d. 

Jan. 15, 1824]. 

4. Hannah, b. Oct. 2, 1757; d. Dec 25, 1761. 

Anne d. June 21, 1759, and John ni. 
Mary Tuttle, d. of Thomas of New 
Haven, May 13, 1760. 

5. John, b. Sept. 23, 1761. 

6. Samuel, b. Jan. 21, 1763. 

7. David, b. lulv 18, 1765. 

8. Lydia, b. July 4, 1768. 

9. Joel, b. Nov. 8, 1772. 

10. Hannah, b. Aug. 19, 1774. 
Sarah, bap. June 7, 1778.2 



Brown. Brown. 

Joseph Bro^wn, s. of James, m. Hannah 

Johnson, d. of Timothy of Derby, Oct. 

u. 1750. 

1. Nathaniel, b. Sept. 17, 1751. 

2. Timothy, b. Dec. 24, 1753. 

3. Phylonica, b. June 14, T756. 

4. Charles Johnson, b. Nov. 4, 1760. 

5. Joseph, h. Nov. 10, 1763. 
I'l. Ruth, b. Sept. 30, 1766. 

7. Dinah, b. Aug. 14, 1770; d. Dec. 8, 1771. 

Laura Brown m. Edward Welton, 1S25. 

Mary Brown m. John Marcloud, 17S0. 

Mary M. BroAwn m. Sam'l Warner, 1S32. 

Mary Brown m. Thomas Juris, 1S37. 

Pamelia Brown m. Peter Brockett, 1S12. 

Philo Brown, s. of Deac. James, ra. 
Esther Ives, d. of Giles, Sept. 16, 1S24. 

I. Willi.Tm Henry, b. Apr. 6, 1827. 
■2. Cornelia Ann, b. Apr. 10, 1S34. 

Polly Brown m. Harvey Allen, 1S32. 
Rachel Brown m. Harvey Patchen, 1S28. 
Mrs. Reuben Brown d. Apr. 18, 1S42, a. 

79- 
Rueben Brown, s. of Reuben, m. Sarah 

Forrest, d. of Samuel, Feb. 17, 1828. 

1. Charles S., b. Feb. 20, 1831. 

2. John D., b. Oct. 8, 1S34. 

3. Henry William, b. Jan. 7, 1830. 

4. Caroline Ruth, b. Dec. 17, 1843. 

5. Sarah Jennet, b. June 27, 1846. 

Ruth E. Brown m. Fred. Goldsmith, 1824. 
Sally Brown m. Harvey Judd, 1821. 

Samuel and Johannah Brown: 

[He d. before Apr., 1745 ] 

6. Hezekiah, b. Nov. 14; d. Feb. 29, 1732-3. 

7. Hezekiah, b. Jan. 14, 1733-4. 

8. Mary, b. Sept. 23, 1735; m. Joseph Guern.sey. 
o. Daniel, b. Feb. 14, 1737-8 [m. Elizabeth Curtis, 

and d. June 30, 1806]. 
10. Lydia, b. Jan. 7, 1839-40; m. Eph. Warner. 
Hannah, m. Daniel Southmayd, 1748. 
Johannah, m. Richard Seymour, 1747. 

Samuel Brown, s. of Samuel, ni. Sarah 
Castle, d. of Isaac, Mch. 22, 1750. [He 
d. June 8, 1808, a. Si.] 

1. Sarah, b. May 6, 1751; m. William Scovill. 

2. Roseanah, b. Oct. 28, 1756. 

3. Freelove (dan.), b. Feb. 16, 1758. 

4. Samuel, b. Dec 27, 1760. 

5. Isaac. 1). May 27, 1766; d. Nov. 9, 1809. 

Sarah D. Brown m. R. E. Perkins, 1S51. 

William Brown, s. of Deac. James, m. 
Sarah S. Kingsbury, d. of John, Esq., 
Dec. 17, 182S. 

1. Marcia R., b. July 31, 1832. 

2. Robert K., b. Dec. 5, 1S33. 

3. Eliza Jane, b. Apr. i, 1835. 

[4 and 5. Son and dau., h. May i, 1841, died.] 

Sarah d. May 28, 1S41, and William m. 
Vienna Fenn, b. Jan. 21, 1S25, d. of 
Asa of Middlebury, Mch. 25, 1S44. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP31 



Bruise. Bull. 

George Bruise of New Haven m. Re 

becca Sarah Forrest, Apr. 30, 1S4S. 

Alfred Bryan of Watertown m. Betsey 
Hungerford, Nov. 15, 1S26. 

Andrew Bryan, s. of Thadeus of Water- 
town, m. Roxana Peck, d. of Ward, 
July 3, 1S14. 

1. Lucius P., b. Mar. 6, 1817. 

2. George A., b. Dec. 15, 1819. 

3. Charles, b. Nov. 10, 1822. 

4. Edward, b Sept. 20, 1825. 

5. William Henry, b. Feb. 7, 1S28. 

Benajah Bryan m. Lucy Davis, Jan. 20, 

lySo.-' 

John, b. Oct. 8, 1780. 
Lucy, b. (3ct. 20, 1785. 

[Lucius P. Bryan m. Jennett White of 
Din-ham, Aug. 25, 1S36.] 

Daniel Buck of Farmington m. Mary 
Hikcox, Oct. 13, 1S29. 

Hannah Buck m. Obadiah Scott, 1716. 

Sarah Buck m. John Welton, 1706. 

The age of William Buck, entered Jan. 
2, 1753- William Buck, the son of 
Elizabeth Chelson, alias Buck, born 
about Oct. II, 1 751, and this day bound 
out by the townsmen of Waterbury to 
Mr. Samuel Peck, as appears by inden- 
tui'e and with the consent of the au- 
thorities. 

Chloe E. Buckingham m. I\L S. Beach, 

1S45. 
Ebenezer N. Buckingham of Oxford was 

mar. to Betsey Sperry of Bethany, at 

Naugatuck, Sept. 15, 1S34. 
Hannah Buckingham m. Irijah Terrell 

177S. 
Samuel Buckingham, s. of Nathan of 

Derby, m. Ruth Fairchild, d. of Nathan 

of Derby, June 28, 17S5. 

1. Cyrenius b. May 30, 17S6. 

2. Ruth, b. Mch. I, 1788. 

3. Lucy, b. May 15, 1790. 

4. Lester, b. Aug. 16, 1794. 

5. Augustus, b. Aug. 22, 1797. 

6. Esther, b. Oct. 11, 1799. 

7. Nathan Fairchild, b. June 10, 1802. 

Scovill M. Buckingham, s. of John, m. 
Charlotte Ann Benedict, d, of Aaron, 
May 18, 1S35. 

I. John Aaron, b. Apr. i, 1830. 

Lester P. Buell of Plymouth m. Louisa 

M. Tuttle, Sept. 29, 1851. 
Ann Buggbe m. Roger Prichard, Jr., 1742. 

Widow Mary Bull d. Jidy 4, 1756. [She 
was widow of Deac. Thomas Hikcox, 
and of Deac. Samuel Bull of Woodbury, 
whom she mar. Nov. 23, 1747-S ] 

Mary Bull m. Philip Tompkins, 1766. 



BuNCE. Burton. 

Daniel P. Bunce of New Haven, and 
Sarah A. Welton [d. of Daniel], were 
mar. in St. John's Church, Sunday, 
May 5, 1S33, by Rev. Allen C. Morgan. 

Alvira Bunnell m. James Bouton, 1S22. 

[Benjamin Bunnell, Jr., s. of Benjamin of 
Derby, m. Ruth vSmith, Oct. 11, 1752, 
and d. in Waterbury, Nov. 5, 1770. 

Charles. Benjamin. 
Reuben, b. Dec. 24, 1765. 
Elizabeth, b. Apr. 12, 1771.] 

Eunice Bunnell m. James Cobborn, 17S4. 
Harriet Bunnell m J. S. Bradley, 1S30. 
Hezekiah and Mabel Bunnell:^ 

Orrel, b. July 7, 1787. 

James A. Bunnell of Litchfield m. Mary 
Ann Hall, May 27, 1839. 

Jehiel Bunnell of Cheshire m. TeniiDer- 
ance Hotchkiss, Nov. 21, 17S4.' 

Lois Bunnell m. Jeremiah Peck, Jr., 1769. 
Lois Bunnell m. Elias Bronson, 1778. 
Luanna Bunnel m. Benj. Uj^son, 1832. 
Lydia Bunnell m. Abner Johnson, 1773. 
Margaret Bunnell m. Benj Warner, 1755. 
Samuel A. Bunnel m. Mary Horton, Nov. 
I <', 1S23. 

Samuel Bunnell m Mrs. Lydia Bradley, 

Mch. 2S, 1831). 

William Bunnel, s. of Nath'l of Cheshire, 
m. Sallv Seley, d. of William, Oct. iS, 
1826. 

William Bunnel m. Loisa Lines of South 
bury, June 5, iS3r). 

Roxanna Burges m. Benj. Munson, 1775. 

Abigail Burnham m. Asa HoiDkins, 1793. 

Elizabeth Burnham m. Joshua Porter, 

Otis Burnham of East Hartford, m. Joan- 
na Wilkinson of West Hartford, Mch. 
30, 1825. He d. in Torringford, Sept. 
21, 1834. 

1. Caroline E., b. in Torringford, June 5, 1830. 

2. Edward Otis, b. in Torringford, Feb. 9, 1835. 

Julia Burr, d. of Jared, d. Sept. 10, 18 10, 

a. 10." 
James Burritt m. Lenah Delaney, Aug. 

I'), 1S51. 

Joseph Burton, s. of Deac. Benjamin of 
Trumbull, m. Susanna Bronson, d. of 
Deac. Stephen, June 23, 1805. 

1. Albert, b. Oct. 14, 1806; d. Aug.. 1S15. 

2. Marcia Content, b. Mch. 31, iSoS; m. Willard 

Spencer. 

3. Susan, b. June 28, iSii; d. Oct., 1815. 



33 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



Burton. Byrnes. 

Susanna d. July 14, iSii [and Joseph 
m. Ann Eliza Clark, d. of Capt. Uzziel 
of Sheffield, Mass., Jan. 2, 1S15. 

4. Frances Elizabeth, h. Aug. 26, i8i6; in. Augus- 

tus Brown. 

5. Charles U. C , b. June 14. 1818. 

6. George W., b. Mch. i, 1822.] 



Byrnes. Camp. 

Caroline E. Grillcy, d. of Jeremiah, 



Sept. 14, 1S43. 

I. John, 1 

and Vb. Oct. 7, iS 57. 
{2. A dau., I d. at birth. 

~^' > Twins; died. 

] Margaret, b. Jan. 24, 1847. 



William H. Bush [from New London] j^hn Byrnes m. Mary White-both 
m. Ehza A. Clark [d. of John], Mch. Losver Canada-May ix 1S37 

iS, iSCO. ,T . . „ „ 



Isaiah Butler [b. Sept. 12, 1726] and Re- 
becca; children born in Waterbury: 

Tryphosa, b. May 15, 1756; m. M. Dunbar. 
Solomon, b. Feb. 23, 1758. 
Jonathan, b. .'\pr. 26, 1760. 

Lydia Butler m. Phinehas Royce, Jr., 

1772. 

Michael Butler m. ^Margaret Lynch, Nov. 
I, 1 849. 

*Nathan Butler [b. June i, 1732, m. Dec. 
S, 1755, Rebecca Rogers, d. of Deac. 
Josiah of Branford, and d. Oct. 17, iSii, 
at Clinton, N. Y. 

Asenath, Salmon, Elsie, Lorain, and Pamela, b. 
1755-1770]- 
(>. Herva, b. July 17, 1771. 
7. Calvin, b. Oct. 6, 1772. 

Sarah Butler m. Daniel Brown, 1S42. 

William Butler of Plymouth m. Augusta 
Merriman, Mch. 22, 1S40. 

Elizabeth Byington m. Miles Gaylord 

iS45- 
Isaac Byington, s. of Jared, Esq., m. 

Esther Smith, d. of Anthony. 

1. Edwin, b. Oct. 20, iSoo. 

2. Emeline, b. Oct. 4, 1802. 

3. Frederick, b. Aug. 2, 1S04. 

4. Henrietta, b. Apr. 30, 1806. 

5. Avis, b. Dec. 10, 1808. 

6. Melissa, b. Feb. 4, 1810. 

Jared Byington, s. of David, m. Rebecca 
Porter, d. of Thomas, Apr. 22, 1779. 



1. Isaac, b. Aug. .12, 1779. 

2. Asahel, b. Feb. i, 1782. 

3. Orren, b. Nov. 11, 1783. 

4. Jes--e, b. Nov. 15, 1785. 

5. Clarissa, b. Apr. i, 178S. 

6. Rebecca, b. Feb. ig. 1700. 

7. Anne, b. Feb. 29, 1792. 

8. Stephen, b. Sept. 20, 1794. 



\ 



Orrin Byington m. Rebecca M. Tuttle — 
both of Wolcott — Apr. 11, 1S32. 

Widow Mehitable Byington d. Feb. 13, 
1S09, a. Si. 

Rachel Byington m. Augustus Rose, 1S36. 

Sarah Byington m. Levi Norton, 1842. 

James Byrnes of Lower Canada m. [Julia 
Gallagher, 1S36. She d. and James m.] 



1. Henry, b. Apr. 4, 

2. John, b. Nov. 5, 1840. 

3. James, b. Jan. 10, 1842. 

4. Peter, b. Apr. 11, 1844! 

5. Matthew David, b. Mch. 18, 1846. 

John Byrnes m. Mary Donnelly, Sept. 21, 

rS5i.^ 

Michael Byrns m. Ellen Hanley, Aug. 4. 

1S51.' 

[Jesse Cady m. Eunice Ward, d. of 
Arab ] 

Mary Cady m. Joseph Riggs, 1S31. 

Betsey Caldwell m. Sam. Munson, 1S40. 

Lucretia Caldwell m. W. H. Stoddard, 

1S5S. 

Israel Calkin m. Sarah Hoadley, d. of 
William and Sarah, Aug. 11, 1752; cer- 
tified by the Rev. ]Mr. Jilark Leaven- 
worth. 

1. Lucy, b. July i8, 1753; m. Joel Tuttle. 

2. Appelina, b. July 8, 1755. 

3. Sarah, b. Dec. i, 1757. 

4. Rozwell, b Oct. 6, 1761. 

5. Ebenezer, b. Aug:. 5; d. Aug. 7, 1765. 
(1. Ithiel, b. Jan. 14, 1767. 

7. Mary, b. Oct. 26, 1770. 

8. A son, b. Oct. 8, 1772. • 

[Roswell Calkins, and Eiinice Hine, b. 
in Derby. Mav 12, 1763, were m. Sept. 

S, 17S2. 

Almira, b. Feb. 14, 1784; m. David Lewis. 
Lovewell, b. Dec. 18, 1785; m. Jerusha Smith. 
Lucy, b. Mch. 3, 1789; m. Elisha Newell. 
Marcia, b. Jan. 28, 1791; m. Chester Beebe. 
Julia, b. May 28, 1794; m. Christopher Ripley. 
Chloe, b. Aug. 6, 1796; m. Josiah Saben. 
Nancy, b. July i, 1799; m. Amos Briggs. 
Elizabeth, b. Aug. 20, 1801; m. James Eaton. 
Mary, b. Sept. 6, 1803; m. John Storm.] 

Abel Camp, s. of Samuel, m. Rachel 
Welton, d. of John, Apr. 14, 1741. . 

1. Ame, b. Dec. 5, 1742; m. Samuel Warner. 

2. .Sarah, b. Oct. 17, 1744; d. Aug. 15, 1749. 

3. Samuel, b. Oct. 6, 1746. 

4. Able, b. July 11. 1748. 

5. Sarah, b. .-^ug. 28, 1750. 

6. Eunice, b. Sept. 26, 1752; dyed in Litchfield, 

Sept. 12; and her dau. Sept. 8, 1772, in five 
days after she was born. 

7. Rachel, b. Sept. 20, 1754; d. Sept. 26, i7';7. 

8. Rachel, b. Feb. 21, 1758. 

9. Eldad, b. June 25, 1760 
10. Bethel, b. Feb. 25, 1763. 

Adah Camp m. W. H. Savage, 1838. 



* He had, at one time, four great-grandsons in Hamilton College. 



FAMILY EECOBDS. 



Ap; 



Camp. Camp. 

Benajah Camp (s. of Joab).^ 

Orren, b. Aug. 29, 1786. 
Chloe, b. June 9, 1788. 

Comfort Camp m. Dr. Jesse Porter, iSoS. 
Emma Camp m. John Patterson, 1849. 
Isaac Camp m. Rachel Meky, Nov. 22, 
1770. 

1. Isaac, b. Aug. 22, 1771; d. Jan. i, 1772. 

2. Abner, b. Jan. 21, 1773. 

Jeremiah Camp m. Elizabeth Downs, 
Aug. 10, 1823. 

I. Emma Ann, b. Aug. 7, 1829. 

Joab and Thankful Camp: 

;. Thankful, b. July 11, 1750. 

6. John, b. Apr. 14, 1753. 

7. Ephraim, b. June 23. 1756. 

8. Sarah, b. Apr. ^, i7=;8. 

9. Phebe, b. May 3, 1760; m. Daniel Ford. 

10. Benajah, b. July 20, 1762. 

II. Joab, b. July 5, 1764. 

Julia Camp m. Jerome B. Strong, 1835. 

Lyman Coe Camp, b. July 3. 1S20, s. of 
Lyman C. of Durham, m. Ulissa E. 
Savage, b. Nov. i, 1S20, d. of Seth of 
Berlin, May 21, 1843 

I. Harriet Pratt, b. Feb. 27, 1844. 
J. Lyman Coe, h. Sept. 17, 1S46. 

Sally Camp m. Sherman Hickcox, 1824. 

Samuel Camp [s. of Edward, m. Doro- 
ttiynVhitmore (widow of Josiah of Mid- 
dletown), July 17, 1712, in Milford. 

1. Mehitable, b. Aug., 1713. 

2. Joel, b. May, 1715 (paid taxes here, 1739-42). 
:;. Abel, b. Dec. 1717; m. Rachel Welton. 

4. Stephen, h. Feb., 1720. 

Samuel moved to Wat. about 1733J and 
d. Apr. 22, 1741. Dorothy d. Sept. 2, 
1749. (Recorded with Abel's family.) 

Samuel and Betty Camp: Record of their 
being mar. in Milford, Oct. 22, 1766. 
[He d. Apr. 22, 1841.] 

1. Betty, b. in Milford, May 2, 1767. 

2. Abel, b. Feb. 11, 1769. 

3. Samuell, b. Apr. 24, 1772. 

4. Eunice Hall, b. May 2, 1774. 

5. Sarah, b. Sept. 8, 1776. 

Samuel Camp, s. of Joab, m. Mary Row(?) 
d. of Daniel of Farmington, Dec. 7, 
1769. She d. Dec. 27, 1777. 

Samuel and Tryphena Camp:^ 

Marv, b. INIay 11, 1781. 
Rhoda, b. Mch. 17, 1783. 
Phineas Royce, b. July 14, 1785. 
Samuel, b. Feb. 2, 17S7. 

Stephen S. Camp from Plymouth, b. July 

11, 1804, m. Abigail Harrison from 
North Branford, Nov. 14, 1832. 

1. Marcus Harrison, b. Mch. 26, 1835. 

2. Maria Mabel, b. June 3, 1841. 

3. Sarah Smith, b. Aug. 19, 1846. 



Candee. Carter. 

Abigail Candee m. Enos Gunn, 1763.' 
Caroline Cande m. Anson Beach, 1833. 
Comfort Cande m. Moses Osborn, 1796. 
Content Cande m. John Nichols, 1S27. 

Enos Candee, s. of Samuel, m. Nabby 
Hatch— both of Oxford— June 5, i768.« 
[He was Dr. Enos and a Tory.] 

Hannah Candee m. Jobamah Gunn, 1772. 

Harvey Candee [s. of Verus?], m. Malin- 
da Tuttle of Cheshire, Sept. 2. 1827. 

Horace Cande [b. Dec. 13, 1805], s. of 
Verus, m. Harriet Thomas, d. of Elisha, 
May 26, 1827. 

[i. Robert, b. 1830.] 

Joseph Beard Candee, s. of Timothy, m. 

Hannah Finch, July 2, 1795. She d. 

Jan. I. 1824, and Joseph m. Lois A. 

Tudd— both of Salem Soc— Apr. 29, 

"1S24. 
Julia Candee m. Richard Sutton, 1S35, 

and Gilbert Prichard, 1845. 
Leveret Candee of Watertown m. [Mrs ] 

Charity Cook, May 3, 1847. 
[Noah Candee, b. May 20, 1736, s. of 

Samuel, m. Martha Strong, d. of Serg. 

Return, Jan. 28, 1767. 

Clarinda, Noah, Martha, Mehitable, Ezra, and 
Riverius (called Verus) were his children, ace. 
to Hon. C. C. Baldwin in Candee Genealogy.] 

Sally D. Candee m. James McEwen, 

1S31. 
Timothy Cande m. Mary Beard. Feb. 7, 

1769. He d. Nov. 20,' iSiS; and she, 

June 28, 1S24. 

1. Joseph Beard, b. Nov. 21, 1760. 

2. Mary, b. Aug. 17, 1771; m. Z. Hungerford. 
^. Content, b. Oct. 5, i 7S4. 

James Carbury of Torrington m. Ann 

Sutton, June 6, 1S24. 
Mary A. Carbury m. W. A. Morris. 1S48. 
Helen Carr m. Charles Guilford, 1839. 
Cynthia Carrington m. S. B. Minor, 1849. 
Rebecca Carrington m. Marcus Sperry, 

1S07. 
Rosetta Carrington m. W. H. Adams, 

iS43- 
Sarah Carrington m. Wm. Clark, 17S5. 
Edward Carroll m. Bridget Sullivan, 

Apr. 18, 1849. 
Jared Carter of Bristol m. Nancy E. 

Russell, Sept. 21, 1840 
Patty Carter m. Julius Perry, 1836. 
Polly Carter m. James Croft, 1S29. 
Preserve W. Carter, b. Oct. 21, 1798, s. 

of [:Maj.] Preserve of Wolcott, m. Ruth 



34 ^\i' 



EISTOEY OF WATERS URY. 



Carter. Castle. 

W. Humiston [widow of Samuel G.], 
and d. of Israel Holmes, June [lo], 1S2S. 

1. Calvin [Holmes], b. May 19, 1829. 

2. Franklin, b. Dec. 20, 1830; d. Apr. ig, 1834. 

3. Kranklin, b. Sept. 30, 1837. 

4. Carlos Frederic, b. Sept. 23, 1841. 

Restore Carter of Philadelphia m. Emily 
Sperry [d. (jf Anson], Nov. 20, 1S38. 

Sarah Case m. Rev. Abr. Fowler, 17S1. 

Dennis Casey m. Mary Sheehan, Feb. i, 
1S51. 

John Casey m. Bridget McCabe, Apr. 12, 

1S51. 
James Cass m. IMary Boylan, Jan. 7, 
1S50.S 

James Cassian m. Honora Delaney, Nov. 
29. 1.S49. 

Abishai Castle, s. of Isaac, m. Merriam 
Bradley, d. of Ebenezer, Mch. 14, 1760. 

1. Bradley, b. Dec. 5, 1761; d. July 19, 1777. 

2. Asher, b. May 10, 1763. 

3. Sarah, b. Apr. 20, 1765. 

4. Filo, b. Feb. 16, '1768. 

5. Molle, b. July 16, 1770. 

6. Rosana, b. July 17, 1775. 

7. Samuel, b. Apr. 24, 1777. 

Asahel Castle, s. of Isaac, m. Deborah 
Allen, d. of Gideon, May 12, 1745. 

1. Tapher, b. Feb. 24, 1745-6. 

2. Levi, b. Oct. 23, 1747. 

3. Joel, b. Dec. 30, 1751. 

4. Simeon, b. May 18, 1753. 

5. John, b. Apr. 24, 1755. 

Asher Castle m. Phebe Merriman, Dec. 
2S, 17S4.^' 

David E. Castle m. Mary ]Martin, Dec. 

15, 1S50. 
Harriet Castle m. Philander Hine, 1836. 

Isaac Castle, s. of Isaac of Woodbury, 
m. Tapher Warner, d. of John, Jan. 21, 

1723-4- 

1. Asahel, b. Aug. 28, 1726. 

2. Sarah, b. Nov. 5, 1727; m. Samuel Brown. 

3. Mary, b. Oct. 25, 1730; m. William Judd. 

4. I.ydea, b. Feb. 25, 1734-5; m. John Parker. 

5. Abisha, b. Jan. 26, 1737-S. 

Tapher d. July 20, 1740, and Isaac m. 
Lydia vScott, d. of Richard of vSunder- 
land, Dec. 21, 1740. 

6. Tapher, b. Oct. 3, 1741; m. Abijah Wilmot. 

7. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 20, 1743. 

8. Isaac, b. Feb. 5, 1744-5; d. Sept. 26, 1760. 

9. Mehitable, b. Sept. 5, 1747; m. Ebenezer Brad- 

ley, Jr. 

10. Richard, b. Dec. 5, 1749. 

11. Daniel, b. Feb. 16, 1751-2. 

12. Amasa, b. Apr. 6, 1755. 

13. Jedidah (a dau.), b. July 2, 1757. 

Isaac B. Castle, s. of John of Watertown, 
m. Marcia Chittenden, d. of Asahel, 
Esq., of Prospect. 

I. John, b. in Watertown, Mch. 7, 1818. 



Castle. Chatfield. 

Marcia d. Apr. ii, 1821, and Isaac m. 
Julia Edwards, d. of David of Water- 
town, Aug. II, 1S23. 

2. Marcia C, b. Oct. 23, 1824; m. Ira Grilley. 

3. David Edwards, b. in Watertown, Nov. 17, 1S28. 

Isaac R. Castle, s. of Levi of Plymouth, 
m. Jane Wanza from Brookfield, Sept. 

1S32. 

I. Levi, b. in Bristol, June 3, 1840. 

Jehiel Castle m. Mary Johnson— both of 

Woodlaridge — Jan. 20, 1802.^ 
Marcia Castle m. C. E. Moss, 1842. 
Polly Castle m. Woodward Hotchkiss, 

1797- 
Samuel and Hannah [Hotchkiss] Castle: 

Emeline; m. Edward Chittenden. 
Loly; m. George Northrop. 
Samuel Augustus. 

Samuel A. Castle, s. of Samuel of Pros- 
pect, ni. Mary Ann Steele, d. of Elisha. 
May 7, 1846. 

I. Elizabeth Hannah, b. Mch. 8, 1S47. 

Sarah Castle m. Harvey Judd, 1782. ^ 
Sarah Castle m. Willis Johnson, 1843. 
Seth Castle m. Olive Stevens, Dec. 28, 
iSoo.^ 

Tapher Castle m. William Tuttle, 1765. 
Stephen M. Cate from Meredith, N. H., 

m. Adelia E. Ovitt, d. of Amos, Mch. 

18, 1839. 

1. Stephen M., b. Apr. 5, 1840. 

2. Imogine Augusta, b. Jan. 14, 1844. 

3. Adelia Ellen, b. Nov. 26, 1846. 

William Cay of Cheshire m. Fanny Far- 
rell, d. of Zebah, Feb. 3, 1S27. 

Rev. Jabez Chadwick m. Miss Sarah 
Stewart of Lee, Mass., Jan. 8, 1801. 

I, Holland Weeks, b. Oct. 15, 1801. 

Mary Chambers m. Wm. Warner, 1762. 
Hannah Chapman m. Reuben Parker, 

1764. 
Maria Chapman m. Wm. Dickinson, 1S40. 
Annah Charles m. Ebenezer Judd, 1765. 
John C. Chase m. Mary A. Bern an of 

Warren, Mch. 17, 1851. 
Lucy Chase m. Franklin Potter, 1850. 
Willis G. Chase of New Preston m. Chloe 

A. Potter [d. of Samuel], Mch. 17, 1851. 
Anna Chatfield ni. David Wooster, 1S21. 
Burritt Chatfield, s. of Joseph, m. June 

29, 1S32, Lucinda Boak from Sheffield, 

Mass., b. Apr. 15, 1810. 

1. Harriet C, b. Aug. 27, 1833. 

2. Laura Elizabeth, b. Mch. 14, 1835. 

3. Rachel Ann, b. June 14, 1S37. 

4. Fanny Maria, b. Jan. 13, 1839. 

5. Emogene, b. Jan. 29, 1841. 

6. Joseph Edward, b. Apr. 14, 1843. 

7. Henry Delizon, b. Feb. 28, 1845. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



-^i'35 



Chatfield. Chatfield. 

Charles T. Chatfield [s. of James], m 
Mary E. Andrews [d. of Benjamin H.], 
Oct. 15, 1S50. 

Cyrus Chatfield m. Philena Martin of 
Prospect, Apr. 2, 1S4S. 

Daniel Chatfield [s. of William, m. Pru- 
dence Baldwin, d. of James. He d. 
July II, iSiS, a. S3; she, Mch., 1828, a. 
92. 

Daniel. Reulien.] 

James, bap. Mch. ig, 1780. 1 

Daniel Chatfield [s. of Daniel, m. Esther 
Lounsbury. She d. May 6, 1848, a. 76. 

I. David. 2. Leonard.] Enos, Esther, Polly, who 
m. J. N. Morriss, and Anna Maria who m. 
Zenas Bronson, were bap. Apr. 28, 1817.I 

David Chatfield, b. Sept. 9. 1794, s. of 
Daniel, m. June 5, 1S20, Polly Hitch- 
cock, b. June 10, 1795, d. of Caleb of 
Southington. 

1. Jane E., b. Aug. 22, 1822; m. M. E. Judd. 

2. Polly Ann, b. Sept. 5, 1824. 

3. Cyrus, b. May 16, 1826. 

4. Fidelia, b. F'eb. 16, 182S. 

5. Emeline, b. Mch. 3, 1833. 

Dennis Chatfield, s. of Joseph, m. Mary 
Jane Matthews, d. of Zeba, Dec. i8, 

iS35- 

1. Charles D., b. May 29, 1S40. 

2. Frances Jane, b. July 2, 1842. 

3. Lyman B., b. Jan. 2S, 1845. 

Henry Chatfield, s. of Joseph, and Re- 
becca Mernman, b. Sept. 14, 1813, d. of 
Samuel of Plymouth (and wid. of Henry 
Terrill), m. Aug. 29, 1S36. 

1. Ellen, b. Oct. 3, 1838. 

2. Emma. b. Aug. i, 1840. 

3. John Henry, b. Sept. 15, 1843. 

4. James Madison, b. Oct. 2S, 1845. 

Isaac Chatfield, Jr., m. Sabria Beebe, 

Nov. I, iSof)." 
James Chatfield, s. of Daniel, m. Tamer 

Nichols, d. of Simeon, Mch. 4, 1812. 

She d. Apr. 30, 1S22, and James m. 

Huldah Hikcox [d. of Timothy], June 

16, 1824. 

I. A son, b. and d. May 2, 1S25. 

[2. Charles Timothy, b. June 21, 1S26.] 

Joseph Chatfield [m. Polly, d. of David 
and Submit (Hotchkiss) Payne.] 

Joseph Edward. 

Fanny, b. May 27, 1803; m. Ed. Russell. 
Rebecca; m. R. M. Wheeler, 1828. 
Mitty [b. July 13, i8o6|; ra. Albert Wooster. 
Burrit, b. Feb. 27, 1808. 
Mary [d. unmarried] . 
Dennis, b. July 3, 1812. 
Henry, b. Sept. 10, 1816. 
Samuel. All these bap. Apr. 11, 1821.I 
Jane Bradley, bap. Oct. 14, 1821 [adopted by 
Lyman Bradley, and m. Dr. Blakeslee]. 

Joseph Edward Chatfield [s. of Joseph] 
m. Nancy Scovill, d. of William, Nov. 
24, 1823. 

Jane and George, bap. July 6, 1828. 



Chatfield. Chipman. 

Nancy d. Dec. 26, 182S, and Joseph m. 
Phebe Irena Hotchkiss [d. of Asahel], 
Dee, I, 1829. 

[Emma, b. Nov. 15, 1830. 

Jo.seph d. Oct. 20, 1830] and Phebe m. 
Humphrey Nichols, 1838. 

Mary Chatfield m. John Alcox, 1755. 

Samuel Chatfield [s. of John of Derby ?] 
and Joanna [Gunn]: 

4. Joanah, b. May 21, 1766; m. Abel Gunn. 

5. Sarah, b. Apr. 21, 1768 [ra. Andrew Osborn]. 

6. Joseph, b. June iS, 1770; m. Polly Payne. 

7. Josiah, b. Dec. 10, 1775 [m. Olive Tucker]. 

8. Rachel, b. Dec. 8, 1778 [m. Stephen Tinker]. 

Joanna d. Aug. 20, 1783, and Samuel 
m. wid. Lydia Peck, Jan. i, 17S4. 

(She had daughters Hannah and Lucy Peck.) 

Samuel Chatfield m. Amanda Merriman, 
Oct. 21, 1S3S. 

Elizabeth Chesey: 

I. Ruhama, b. Jan. 9, 1748-0. 

Samuel Chidester and Mabel [Tuller], 
his wife, who were mar. in Simsbury, 
in the year 1719. 

I. Andrew, b. Oct. 

[Mahabel, b. Feb. 22, 1699, was d. of 
John Tuller, and Elizabeth (Case), the 
wid. of Joseph Lewis, Sr. , of Simsbury. 
She was therefore half-sister to Deac. 
Joseph Lewis.] 

Harriet Chidsey m. A. H. Rogers, 1S25. 
John Chidsey [s. of John of N. H.]: 

6. Sarah, b. Oct. 28, 1758. 

7. Simon, b. Mch. 3, 1762. 

Elizabeth Chilson, see William Buck. 

Hiram Chipman of Plymouth and Eliza- 
l^eth Johnson— their intention of mar- 
riage having been published in Ply- 
mouth according to law — were mar. 
Sept. 2, 1S42. 

Sabra Chipman [b. about 1777] "^ Zenas 
Hungerford, 1S33. 

Samuel Chipman, formerly from Wal., 
b. July 16, 17S0, and Nancy Potter from 
Hamden, b. Sept. 14, 17S4, were mar. 
Dec. 27, 1802. 

1. Samuel Dana, b. Dec. 28, 1804. 

2. Sherman Benjamin, b. June 13, 1806. 

3. Lyman, b. Nov. 9, 1808. 

4. William, b. Aug. 13, 1811. 

5. George Enos, b. Feb. 9, 1813. 

6. Joseph, b. July 6, 1815. 

7. Timothy Turner, b. Apr. 3, 1818. 

8. Ransom, b. Nov. 13, 1819. 

g. Daniel Levi, b. Nov. 10, 1821. 
10. Elizabeth Nancy, b. Apr. 2, 1824. 

II. Martha Ann, b. Feb. 5, 1826; d. Mch. 4, 1831. 



36 AP 



HISTOItY OF WATERBURT. 



Chipmax. Clark. 

Samuel D. Chipman, s. of Samuel, m. 

Julia Baldwin, d. of David, Apr. "i 

1S2S. 

1. Martha A., b. July 30. 1832. 

2. John B., b. Mch. 18,' 1836. 

3. Matthew Henry, b. Apr. 19, 1840. 

William Chipman, b. Aug. 26, iSii. s. of 
Samuel, m. May 6, 1840, Rowena Bald- 
win, b. Apr. II, 1S16, d. of Elias of 
Humphreysville. 

1. Jane Elizabeth, b. Sept. 10, 1S42. 

2. Susan Nancy, b. Nov. 25, 1844. 

[Asahel Chittenden, s. of Nathaniel and 
Mehitable (Beebe), m. Anna Lewis, d. 
of John, Jr., 17S3. He d. May, 1813. 

1. Clarissa, b. Mch. 3, 17S4. 

2. Amanda, b. Dec., 1787. 

3. Marcia, b. 1790; m. Isaac Castle. 

4. Lucius, b. 1794. 

5. Asahel, b. May, 1797. 

6. Edward, b. Feb. 24"^ 1801. 

7. Anna, b. Dec, 1804. 

8. Alevia, b. Dec, 1806. 

'). Richard Handy, li. Dec, 1S09.] 

Edward Chittenden, s. of Asahel of Pros- 
pect m. Emeline Castle, d. of Samuel, 
Apr. 3. 1S28. 

1. Emeline, b. in Prospect, May 22, 1829. 

2. Ellen A., b. in Prospect, June 23, 1832. 

David Chrisee and Hannah [Wilmot 
were mar. in Bethlehem Society, Nov. 
15. 1753- 

1. Jemima] b. in Woodbury, May 21, 1755. 

2. Mary, b. in Woodbury, Mch. 10, 1757. 

3. Naomi, b. Apr. 2, 1739. 

4. Preserved, b. Mch. 6, 1762. 

5. Israel, b. Mch. 31, 1764. 

6. Lihcrty, b. Mch. 26, 1769. 

7. Hannah, b. Oct. 6, 1771. 

8. Sene, b. .May 23, 1774. 

Abigail Church m. Erastus Welton, 1776. 

George Watson Church, bap. June 22, 
1823." 

Timothy Church from Winchester m. 
Maria Roberts from Goshen, May 4, 

1S36. 

1. Charles Washburn, b. Sept. 12, 1839. 

2. Stephen Olin, b. Oct. 24, 1843. 

3. Harriet Ann, b. Nov. 6, 1846. 

William Church of Hartford m. Lois 
Upson, d. of Horatio, Apr. 8, 1S22. 

Henry Churchill from Northfield, b. Mch. 
17, 1818, m. Irena H. Matthews, d. of 
Zeba, Sept. 26, 1842. 

I. Flora Cordelia, b. July 2, 1846. 

Thomas Claffey m. Mary Phalan, Jan., 
1840. 

1. James, b. Dec. 7, 1842. 

2. Frank, b. Sept. i, 1844. 

3. Thomas, b. July 17, 1S46. 

Alice Clark m. John Weed, 1735. 

Allen Clark of Milford m. Charlotte Guil- 
ford, Nov. 28, 1832. 



Clark. Cl.ark. 

Amos [s. of John] and Eunice Clark: 

Janet and Abigail, bap. Sept. ^o, 1S21.I 
Susan Emeline, bap. July 13, 1823. 

Asahel Clark, b. Aug. 9, 17S9. son of 
William, m. Dec. 19, 18 12, Ruth A. 
Selkrig, b. July 28, 1791, d. of Osee of 
Litchfield. 

1. William Edwin, b. Oct. 24, 1813- d Nov i- 

1834- ' ■ ■" 

2. Mary Hansa, b. Oct. 22, 1S15. 

3. Joseph Hopkins, b. Sept. 4, 1818. 

4. Henry Martin, b. Oct. i, 1821. 

5. Emeline, b. Mch. 31, 1824; d. Jan. 2, 1825. 

6. Flora Maria, b. Nov. i, 1825; m. E. W Pierce. 

7. Emeline Eliza, b. Mch. 17, 1828- d Nov 27' 

1842. ' '' 

8. Jane Rebecca, b. May 6, 1831; d. Feb. 14, 1833 

9. Charles Rodney, b. July 4, 1833. 
10. Martha Jane, b. .Mch. 14, 1836. 

Betsey Clark m. Thomas Judd, 1800. 
Betsey Clark m. Russell Todd, 1S38. 
Caleb Clark m. Lois [How, Jan. 19, 1722. 

1. Margery, b. Apr. 14, 1723; m. Stephen Tudd. - 

2. Eunice, b. Mch. 23, 1725; m. Ambrose Hikcox. 

3. Phebe, b. Mch. i, 1728; m. Abraham Barnesand 

Gideon Scott. 

4. Lois, b. Aug. 31, 1730; m. Abel Scott. 

All these b. in Wallingford, are not mentioned 
in Caleb's will.] 

Born in Waterbury: 

5. Caleb, b. Dec. 14, 1732. 

6. Hannah, b. Apr. 20, 1735; d. Aug., 1752. 

7. Daniel, b. Sept. 10, 1737. 

8. James, b. Aug. 2, 1740. 

9. Jonas, b. Jan. 10, 1743. 

Caleb m. Apr. 10, 1750, Rebecca, wid. 
of Samuel Thomas, and d. July 29, 1768. 
Caleb Clark, s. of Caleb, m. Elizabeth 
How, d. of Daniel, Nov. 6, 1756. 

1. Amos, b. Jan. i, 1758. 

2. Hannali, b. Dec. 10, 1759. 

Cyrus Clark, Esq., s. of Ebenezer of 
Washington, m. Nancy Bronson, d. of 
Mark, dec'd, Feb. 5, 1S07, and d. Jan. 
8, 1S29. 

1. Henrietta Sophia, b. Oct. 28, 1809; m. H.White. 

2. Esther Hopkins, b. Oct. 21, 1813; d. Sept. 4, 1815. 

3. Mary Ann, b. Feb. 23, 1815; m. Walter Clark. 

4. Henry Bronson, b. July 3, 1822. 

Daniel Clark, s. of Caleb, m. Elizabeth 
Dowd, d. of John of Middletown, Apr. 
12, 1759. 

1. Daniel, b. Apr. 12; d. Apr. 13, 1760. 

2. Phebe, b. Dec. 6, 1762. 

3. Truman, b. Nov. 12, 1764. 

Daniel Clark, s. of Thomas, dec'd, m. 
Polly, d. of Isaac [Booth] Lewis, Feb. 

10. 1793. 

1. Thomas, b. Mch. 11, 1794. 

2. Isaac Lewis, b. June 25, 1796. 

3. Polly Nancy, b. Sept. 19, 1799 [d. 1811]. 
Albert Booth, and Henry fidwin, bap. Feb. 7, 

1S13.1 
James Edward, bap. June 26, 1S14. 
Edward Albert, bap. Sept., 1816. 

[Polly d. July 16, iSii] and Daniel m. 
Polly Hitchcock. He d. Oct. 29, 1847. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



apSI 



Clark. Clark. 

Daniel B. Clark m. Delia A. Walton of 

AVolcott. Mch. 27, 1834. 
David Clark, s. of Thomas, m. Hannah 

Nichols, d. of Samuel of Lebanon, Oct. 

27, 1772. 

I. Hannah, b. June 5, 1774; m. Reuben Adams. 

[Edward Clark, s. of Eli, m. Caroline 
Smith, d. of Matthew, Aug. 26, 1S23. 
She d. Dec. 21, 1S36, and Edward m. 
Maria P. Stone, d. of Ezekiel, Dec. 6, 
1837, and d. Feb. 5, 1849. 

I. Edward Payson, b. Apr. 10, 1845.] 

Edward S. Clark from Westhampton, 
]\Iass., m. Sophia D. Clark from Hat- 
field, Mass., Oct. 16. 1844. 

I. Catherine Sophia, b. Aug. 10, 1S45. 

Eli Clark, s. of Timothy, m. Rebeckah 
Benedict, d. of Aaron, Dec. 28, 1792, 
and d. Dec. 20, 1843. 

1. Joseph, b. Nov. 3, 1793; d. Sept. 7, 1S16. 

2. Polly, b. luly 31, 1796; m. MerUn Mead. 

3. iNIaria, Ij.iMch. 12, 1709; m. Solomon M. Smith 

of New York, May 13, 1820. He d. Apr. 10, 
1822, and she m. [Rev.] John T. Baldwin of 
New Milford. 

4. Harriet, b. Nov. 30, 1S02; m. Edward Scovill. 

5. Edward, b. June 4, 1805. 

6. Eli Benedict, b. Feb. 22, 1S08. 

7. Charles, b. Nov. 22, 1810. 

a. Mary Ann, b. July 20, 1813. 
Q. Timothv Bronson, b. Nov. 10, 1815. 
10. James, b. Sept. 18, 1818. 

Elias Clark from Washington, b. Feb. 
24, 1780. and Elizabeth B. Newton from 
Roxbury, b. May 26, 1781, m. Oct. 8, 
1801. 

1. Samuel Goodrich, b. July 19, 1802; d. Feb. 16, 

1803, in Washington. 

2. Elizabeth M., b. Dec. 16, 1803; m. R. Holmes. 

3. Elias Newton, b. Oct. 7, 1806; d. July 15, 1812. 

4. Thomas Elmore, b. Jan. 3, 1808; d. Nov. 17, 

1840, in Arkansas. 

5. Daniel Baker, b. Oct. 17, 1811. 

6. Elias Newton, b. Nov. 14, 1814. 

7. Sarah Jane, b. July i, 1817; m. Henry Minor. 

8. George Hobart, b. Mch. 15, 1821; d. Aug. 24, 

1S40, in Arkansas. 

Eliphalet Clark m. Abigail Garnsey [b. 
in Milford, 1726], d. of Jonathan (ist). 
She d. June 17, 1746. 

I. Abigail, b. May 11, 1746; m. Jonas Hikcox. 

Eliza Clark m. Edward Marks, 1S38. 
Elon Clark from Milford, b. May 12, 1792, 

and Lois Fenn from Middlebury, b. 

Dec. 26, 1794, m. Feb. 4, 1813. 

1. Benjamin Fenn, b. Oct. 31, 1815. 

2. Charles D.. b. July 20, 1822. 

Lois d. May i, 1827, and Elon m. Sally 
B. Hull, d. of Joseph, Oct. 18, 1827. 

3. Sarah, b. Aug. 25, 1828; ra. C. S. Vancleef. 

4. Elizabeth M., b. Mch. 5, 1830; m. Joel Scott. 
s. Frederic S., b. Mch. 22, 1832; d. Feb. 10, 1834. 
6. Emily A., b. Sept. 17, 1836. 

Emma Clark m. Charles Upson, 1823. 



Clark. Clark. 

Hannah Clark m. Gideon Piatt, 1783. 

Henry L. Clark d. Nov. 10, 1846, a. 27.'- 

Rev. Jacob L. Clark, b. in Westhamp- 
ton, Mass., Sept. 19, 1807, was mar. to 
Mary T. Scovill. d. of James, Esq., by 
Rev. O. Clark, D.D., Apr. 28, 1839. 

I. Alary Thankful Scovill, b. Apr. 23, 1S42. 

Mary d. May 2, 1842, and Jacob was 
mar. in Brooklyn, N. Y., by Rev. N. E. 
Cornwall, to Mary D. F. Taylor, Sept. 
12, 1848.2 
John Clark, s. of Joseph, m. Hannah 
Brooks, d. of Stephen of Farmington, 
in the parish of New Cambridge, Sept. 
9, 1747. He d. Oct. I, 1749, and Han- 
nah m. Cornelius Graves. 

I. John, b. May 11, 1748. 

John Clark, Jr. [b. in Milford about 1765], 
s. of John, m. MoUe Munson, d. of Her- 
man, Apr. 9, 178S. [He moved with 
his family to Medina, O., 1818.] 

1. Herman Munson, b. Aug. 29, 1789. 

2. Polly, b. Nov. 10, 1791. 

3. Ransom, b. Apr. 8, 1794. 

4. [Dr.] Bela Bronson, b. Oct. i, 1796. 

5. John Lines, b. Aug. 8, 1799. 

6. Amos, b. Dec. 3, 1801. 

7. Jeremiah, b. June 4, 1804. 

8. Anson, b. Dec. 10, 1806. 
g. Aliel, b. July 12, 1812. 

John Clark from Washington m. Lucy 
Porter, wid. of Ansel, Apr. 3, 1817. 

Their first children: i pair Twins, b. Jan. 20, 
1818. One named Caroline Miliscent; one 
named Catharine Maria (m. Sherman Steele). 

3rd. A son, James, b. Apr. 30, 1820; d. Mch., 
1842. 

4th. A pair Twins, b. Jan. 28, 1823. One named 
Lydia Eliza (m. W. H. Bush); one named 
Lucy Ann (m. J, E. Smith). 

[Joseph Clark's will, 1762, mentions 

Joseph's heirs. 

Lydia; m. Wheeler. 

Hannah; m. Plumb. 

Tabitha; m. Ebenezer AUyn, 1742. 

Deborah; m. Sanford. 

Dinah; m. Samuel Curtis, 1740. 
Lucy; m. Benjamin Matthews.] 
Samuel, s. of Joseph, d. Sept. 28, 1749. 

Joseph Clark, Jr., s. of Joseph, was mar. 
by Capt. Thomas Hart of Farmington, 
to Mary Clark, d. of Abraham of South- 
ington, in Farmington, Dec. 8, 1741, 
and d. Jan. 15, 1749-50. 

1. Mary, b. Oct. 3, 1743. 

2. Abner, b. May 12, 1745. 

3. Ruth, b. Aug. 28, 1747. 

4. Lydia, b. Oct. 5, 1749. 

Merrit Clark, b. Mch., 1795. s. of Oliver 
of Milford, m. Sarah Gibbs, d. of Obed, 
Jan., 1818. [She d. Aug., 1851.] 

1. Henry L., b. Sept., 1819; d. Nov. 8, 1846. 

2. Eliza A., b. Apr., 1825 [d. Aug., 1850]. 

3. Ellen M., b. July, 1828. 

Merit Clark and Katurah:' 

Emily, bap. Aug. 11, 1822. 



38 -^p 



BISTORT OF WATERS UHY. 



Clark. Clark. 

Phebe Clark m. Ephraim Roberts, 1770. 
Polly Clark m. Elijah Hotchkiss, 1795. 
Rebecca Clark m. Daniel Steele, 1790. 
Sally Clark m. Bezaleel Scott, 1S27. 
Susan J. Clark m. G. B. Hazard, 1S41. 

Sylvester Clark of Watertown m. Levina 
Beebe, d. of Amzi, dec'd, of Salem, 
Jan. 4, 1830. 

Thomas Clark, s. of William of Lebanon, 
m. Sarah Strong, d. of John of Wind- 
sor, June 27, 1 71 7. (Cloth weaver, in 
deed of 1724.) 

1. Marah, b. Oct. 31, 1718; m. Timothy Judd (not 

Benj. Harrison). 

2. Timothy, b. Mch. 22, 1721-22; d. Nov. 23, 1727. 

3. Sarah, b. Dec. 13, 1723; m. Stephen Upson, 3d. 

4. Hannah, b. Jan. 31, 1726 [m. Rev. Solomon 

Mead, Jan. 7, 1765; d. July 24, iSoo]. 

5. Hephzibah, b. Oct. 17, 1729; m. Jos. Hopkins. 

6. Timothy, b. May 19, 1732. 

7. Esther, b. June 22, 1735; m. Phineas Porter. 

8. Thomas, b. Jan. 26, 1737-S. 
g. David, b. Apr. 25, 1740. 

Sarah d. Sept. tS, 1749, and Thomas 
m. Mary Harrison, relict of Benjamin, 
July 30, 1760. and d. Nov. 12, 1764. 

Thomas Clark, s. of Thomas, Esq., 
dec'd, m. Mary Hine, d. of Daniel of 
New Milford, Mch. 20, 1765. 

1. Daniel, b. Dec. 31, 1765; d. July 26, 1766. 

2. Rusha, b. July 13, 1767. 

3. Sarah, b. June 15, 1770; m. Lemuel Harrison. 

4. Daniel, b. Apr. 10, 1772. 

5. Aurila (Aurelia), b. Feb. 3, 1779. 

Her son, Benjamin Upson, bap. Apr. 28, 1S17.1 

[Thomas d. suddenly Oct. 25, 1779] and 
Mary m. Benjamin Upson, Jan. 24, 

1780. 

Timothy Clark, s, of Thomas, m. Sarah 
Hopkins, d. of Timothy, dec'd, Nov. 4, 
1756. 

1. Sarah, 1>. Oct. 9, 1757: d. May 6, 1770. 

Sarah d. Oct. 21, 1757, and Timothy m. 
Hannah Bronson, d. of Isaac, June 13, 
1759- 

2. Asael, b. July 16, 1760 [d. Dec. 16, 1787]. 

3. William, b. June 11, 1763. 

4. Eli, b. Oct. 2, 1764. 

5. Molle, b. Oct. 10, 1766. 

Hannah d. Sept. 15, 17S3 [and Timothy 
m. his third wife, Elizabeth Porter, d. 
of Thomas. She d. Feb. i, 1S15], and 
he, Sept. 18, 1824, a. 92. 

"Walter Clark of Mobile m. Mary Ann 
Clark [d. of Cyrus], Aug. 26, 1839. 

■William Clark, s. of Timothy, m. Sarah 
Carrington of New Haven, Apr. 14, 

1785. 

Clarissa, Laura, Asahel, Almira, Elias, Sally 

and William, bap. July 16, 1801.' 
Fanny, bap. Apr. 29, 1804. 
Margaret, bap. Mch. 18, 1809. 



Clark. Cole. 

William Clark m. Nancy J. Adams, Sept. 

iS, 1S2S. 

Mary Clauson (wid.) m. Timothy Judd, 

1783- 
John Cleary m. :\Iary Rutigan, Sept. 14, 

Cornelia Cleaver m. David Atkins, I784.''' 

Martha Clemens m. Edmund Woodford, 

1S47. 

Janett Cleveland m. C. P. Welton, 1S47. 

Mary Cleveland m. Lucius Curtiss, 1S37. 

William J. Cleveland m. Harriet A. Mer- 
rill, Oct. II, 1S49. 

Dr. Daniel Clifford: 

Hannah, bap. Apr. 3, 1768.- 
Elizabeth; m. Zenas Hungerford, 1791. 

James Harvy Cobborn m. Eunice Bun- 
nell, Feb. 19, 1784. 

1. Rebekah, b. Feb. i, 1785. 

2. Chester, b. July 17, 1787.. 

Asahel Coe and Maria [Wetmore]: 

Charles Wetmore, bap. Aug. 2, 1831. 
Edward Baldwin, bap. Sept. i, 1833. 

Flora Coe m. Anson Stocking, 1825. 

Isaac Coe, s. of John A. Coe of Derby, 
m. Augusta A. Hoadley, d. of Hiel, 
Apr. 19, 1841. 

1. Catharine Grace, b. Nov. 6, 1842. 

2. Irving Hiel, 1 

and Vb. May 12, 1847. 

3. Isaac Harvey, ) 

Israel Coe :' 

Russell, bap. Sept. i, 1822. 
Cornelia; m. Israel Holmes, 1848. 

James M. Coe m. Bridget Breeman — 
both of Wolcottville — Feb. 10, 1S49. 

John Coe of Oxford m. Mary Hoadley, 

Sept. 3, 1S37. 

Orril Coe m. Samuel J. Stocking, 1834. 

Robert Coe of Bethany m. Emily J. Hor- 
ton, May 18, 1S42. 

Mary Ann Colby m. Orange Gillet, 1S34. 

John Cole, s. of John, m. Sarah Page, d. 
of Timothy — all of Wallingford — Aug. 
24, 1754. 

1. Sarah, b. Mch. 28, 1755. 

2. Thankful, b. Oct. 16, 1757. 

Sarah, wife of John, d. Nov. 27, 1757. 

3. Timothy, l>y his second ii'i/e, b. Oct. 12, 1759. 

4. John, b. July 18, 1761. 

5. Luraine, b. Nov. 17, 1763. 

6. Lucy, b. Aug. 26, 1766. 

Mary A. Cole m. Edgar Hotchkiss, 1843. 

Moses Cole [s. of Samuel of Wallingford] 
and Mary: 

3. Mary, b. Apr. 17, 1751. 

4. Moses, b. Aug. 4, 1753. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP39 



Coles. Constant. 

Sarah Coles d. Jan 30, 1811, a. So.^ 

Thomas Cole [s. of Thomas and Martha 

(Judd), m. June 20, 1744, Mary Williams, 

b. Sept. 25, 1719, d. of James. He d. 

Mch. I, 1S05. 

1. Eunice]; m. Samuel Doolittle. 

2. Abigail, b. Nov. 24, 1747; d. July 6, 1749. 

3. A son, b. Oct. 26, 1749. 

4. Abigail, b. Nov. 26, 1751; d. Mch. 9, 1776. 

5. Levy (son), b. June 8, 1753. 

6. Mary, b. Jan. 28, 1755 [m. Gideon Leavenworth 

of Woodbury, and d. 1836]. 

7. Experience, | d. Jan. 14, 17SS. 

and \-h. Feb. 22, 1758; 

8. Sarah, ) m. Woodruff. 

9. Thomas, b. Nov. 20, 1760. 

William and Esther Coal: 

0. Benjamin, b. May 29, 1759. 

10. Reuben, b. Sept. 9, 1761. 

See also Cowles. 
Roxana Coley m. G. P. Andrews, 1845. 
Eunice Collins m. James Hickcox, 1777.^ 
John Collins m. Mary Thompson, Feb. 5, 

1S51. 
Sheldon Collins, b. May 14, 18 14, s. of 

Ahira of Nau., m. Luc}^ Newton, b. 

1S22, d. of William of Albany, N. Y., 

May 14, 1845. 

I. William Newton, b. Mch. 14, 1846. 

Letetia Combs m. Stephen C. Warner, 
I S4 1 . 

William Comes [b. 17S1, s. of William 
and Eunice (Weed), m. Esther Bron- 
son, Sept. 21, 1802, in Waterbury. 

William Dennis, b. May 7, 3808.] 
Janette Belinda, bap. May 5, 1816.I 

[Dr.] Roger Conant, s. of Col. [Shubael] 
of Mansfield, m. EHzabeth Bronson, d. 
of Thomas, dec'd, July 14, 1774, and d. 
Feb. 8, 1777 [in his 33d year, on Long 
Island; a surgeon in the Revolutionary 
War. His widow m. Josiah Hatch]. 

1. Clarissa, b. Oct. 4, 1775; d. Apr. i, 1777. 

Jonathan Condar of New London m. 

Mary Gillemore, Nov. 12, 184S. 
Edward Condrum m. Maria Sullivan — 

both of Naugatuck — Sept. 23, 1850. 
Mrs. Abigail Conklin d. in Waterbury, 

Apr. 5, 1765. 
Catharine Conkling m. Culpepper Fris- 

bie, and Jesse Leavenworth, 1761. 
Patrick Conlon m. Catharine Reed, May 

15, 1S50. 
John Connor m. Bridget McDonner 

(McDonald), in Ireland, 1S45. 

1. Dennis, b. Nov. 30, 1845. 

2. Ellen, b. May 28, 1847. 

[Silas Constant m. Amy Lewis, d. of 
John, and d. at Yorktown, N. Y., Mch. 
22, 1825 — Pastor of the First Presby- 
terian Church.] 



Cook. 



Cook. 



[See Jonathan Beebe.) 
Caroline Cook m. Joel Wilkinson, 1836. 

Daniel Cook, s. of Moses, m. Sally Sperry, 
d. of Capt. Jacob, Nov. 25, 1799. 

1. Marcus, b. Sept. 12, 1800. 

2. Sarah Perkins, b. Aug., 1S04. 
Moses Stiles, bap. Jan. 30, 1814.1 

Ebenezer Cook, s. of Henry, m. Phebe 
Blakeslee, d. of Moses, May 10, 1744. 

1. Huldah, b. Apr. 26, 1745. 

2. Joel, b. Aug. 3, 1746. 

3. Justus, b. May 25, 1748 [grad. at Yale, 1777]. 

4. Jonah, b. Aug. 11, 1750. 

5. Ury, b. Oct. 20, 1752 [left Yale to enter the 

army, and soon died] . 

6. Rosel, b. May i, 1755 [grad. at Yale, 1779]. 

7. Nise (dau.), b. Apr. 17, 1758. 
S. Arbe, b. Apr. 4, 1760. 

9. Sarinda, b. Sept. 20, 1764. 
[10. Ebenezer, preached at ISIontville, 50 yrs.] 

Edward B. Cook [s. of Joseph] m. Dolly 
McLallan, Sept. 4, 1831. 

Elias Cook, s. of Moses, m. Hannah Bar- 
tholomew, d. of Daniel, late of Ply- 
mouth, dec'd, Nov. 16, 1S13 [and d. 
Mch. 14, 1S47]. 

Eunice Cook m. Elias Ford, 1798. 

George W. Cook, s. of Joseph, m. Sept. 
26, 1837, Emily Catharine Johnson, b. 
Apr. 18, 1799, d. of Thomas of Middle- 
town. 

1. Gertrude Elizabeth Hubbard, b. Oct. 2q, 1838. 

2. Ella Scovill, b. Oct. 7, 1842. 

[Henry Cook, b. in Wallingford, 1683 
(s. of Henry, b. 1647, s. of Henry Cook 
and Judith Birdsale, who were m. June, 
1639, at Plymouth, Mass.), m. Expe- 
rience Liman, who d. 1709, and Mary 
Frost, d. of John and Mary of Branford. 

1. Sarah, b. Maj^ 5, 1720. 

2. Ebenezer, b. JMch. 5, 1721. 

3. Henry, b. Aug. 17, 1723. 

4. Thankful, b. June, 1725; m. Abel Bacheldor. 

5. Jonathan, b. about 1727.] 

Henry Cook [b. in Branford, Aug. 17, 
1723], s. of Henry, m. Hannah Benham, 
d. of Nathan of Wal., Nov. 7, 1745. 

1. Thankful, b. Jan. 12, 1746-7. 

2. Mary, b. Mch. 30, 1748; d. June 11, 1760. 

3. Sarah, b. Mch. 5, 1749-50; d. June 15, 1760. 

4. Zuba, b. Dec. 24, 1751; d. June 17, 1760. 

5. Lemuel, b. Dec. 7, 1754; d. June 24, 1760. 

6. Selah, b. Dec. ig, 1756. 

7. Trueworthy, b. Sept. 29, 1759. 

\&. Lemuel, b. 1764; m. Hannah Curtiss. 
9. Mary.] 

Joel Cook [s. of Ebenezer] m. Dinah 
Dunbar [d. of John], Nov. 17, 1768 [and 
d. in Potterville, Bradford Co., Penn., 
a. 90.] 

1. Levi, b. Sept. 14, 1769. 

2. Cloe, b. June 25, 1771 [m. Emblem Barnes]. 

3. Zenas, b. July 7, 1773. 

4. Dinah, b. Mch. 26, 1775 [m. Eldad Jerome]. 

5. Huldah, b. Dec. 29, 1777. 

6. Uri, b. Dec. 24, 1770. 



40 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



Cook. Cook. 

John Cook m. Martha Shipley, May 17, 

1 .846. 

Jonathan Cook, s. of Henry, m. Ruth 
Lutington of New Haven, June 15, 
1735- 

1. Jonathan, b. Mch. 29, 1736. 

2. Jesse, b Feb. i, 1739. 

3. Titus, b. May 2, 1741. 

4. Sarah, b. Oct. 21, 1744. 

5. Abel, b. May 18, 1747. 

Joseph Cook, s. of Moses, m. AnnaBron- 

son, d. of Ezra, Aug. iS, 1792. 

1. Edward Bronson, b. Mch. iS, 1793. 

2. Samuel, b. Dec. 12, 1794. 

3. Susanna Judd, b. Oct. 25, 1797; m. Mark Leav- 

enworth. 
4 Sally Leavenworth, b. Oct. 31, 1799; m. Solomon 
Curtis. 

5. Nancy, b. Nov. 16, 1801; m. William Scovill. 

6. Nathan, b. Jan. 8, 1804. 

7. George, b. Apr. 8, 1806 [d. Jan. 19, 1815]. 

8. George William, b. Feb. 28, 181 1. 

[Joseph Cook d. Mch. 26, 1S55, and his 
wife ten hours after, on the same day.] 
Joseph Cook, formerly from Eng., m. 
Rutha Granniss, wid. of Caleb, Jan. 3, 
1827. 

Lucian P. Cook of Barnwell, S. C, m. 

Sarah B. Judd [d. of Hawkins], Oct. 

15, 183S. 
Lucy Cook m. Isaac Benham. 

Martin Cook of Southington m. Jerusha 
Frost [wid. of Alpheus], Mch. 19. 1S38. 

Mary Cook m. J. W. Dermott, 1S51. 

Moses Cook [eldest s. of Samuel of 
Wallingford m. Sarah Culver, June 18, 
1740. 

1. Charles, b. June 3, 1742; m. Sybel Munson. 

2. Moses, b. Alay 30, 1744. 

3. Sarah, b. June 13, 1747; d. in Middlebury, Apr. 

5, 1823, unmarried I . 

Children born in Waterbury: 

4. Esther, b. Jan. 27, 1749-50 [ra. Joseph Beebe]. 

5. Elizabeth, b. May 15, 1752; m. Benj. Baldwin. 

6. Hannah, b. Jan. 10, 1755; m. Titus Bronson. 

vSarah, d. Jan. 4, 1760, and Moses m. 
Dinah, wid. of Benj. Harrison, Jr., June 

7. 1762, who d. Oct. 4, 1792. 

7. Lydia, b. j\Ich. 27, 1765; m. John Hickcox. 

The above Moses Cook died by a wound 
upon his head, which wound was occa- 
sioned by a stroke from an Indian with 
a flat-iron which weighed 4^ lbs., on 
the 7th day of December, A. D. 1771, 
at the house of Mr. Clarks, in Bethany, 
and expired the 12th day of .said De- 
cember. Said Indian had his trial the 
Feb. following, for murdeiing the above 
s'd Cook, and sentence to be hang'd on 
the 17th day of June following. 



Cook. Corcoran. 

Moses Cook, Jr., s. of Moses, m. Jemiah 

Upson, d. of Joseph, dec'd, Nov. 4, 1766. 

She d. Mch. 6, 1821 [he, Dec. 1831]. 

1. Joseph, b. Nov. 4, 1767. 

2. Lucy, b. Sept. 27, 1769; d. 1S35, unmarried. 

3. Daniel, b. Jan. 5, 1773. 

4. Hannah, b. !Mch. 5, 1775. 

5. Anna, b. Mch. 8, 1778; m. Mark Leavenworth. 

6. Ehas, b. Dec. 26, 1783. 

Samuel Cook, s. of Joseph, m. Charity 
Warner, b. June 15, 1796, d. of Enos, 
Nov. 7, 1S13. 

I. Anna Maria, b. Sept. 28, 1815; m. L. E. Rice. 

[Samuel, d. Jan. 22, 1S35. and] Charity 
m. Leveret Candee. 

Samuel Cook of Winchester m. Sarah A. 
Downs, Oct. 21, 1835. 

Sarah Cook m. Ezekiel Sanford, 1765. 

Sarah Cook m. Amos Seymour, 1787. 

Sibble Cook m. Samuel Hills, 1791. 

Sybel Cook m. Thomas Welton, 1797. 

William Cook [s. of Zenas, and Mari- 
etta Plumb, d. of Aaron, m. 1837. 

Aaron Plumb, b. 183S; died 1839. 
Carlos Wilco.x, b. 1839; d. 1841.] 
George Augustus and Celestia Ashley, bap. Sep. 

4, 1842.1 
[Carlos Wilcox, b. about 1844.] 

*Zenas Cook, s. of Joel of Plj'mouth, m. 
Polly Lewis [d. of Samuel, Jr.] Feb. 
1800. 

1. William, b. Apr. 17, 1802, in Plymouth. 

2. Sarah Curtiss, b. Jan. 16, 1807, in Plymouth. 

3. George L., b. June 6, 1800, in Salem; d. Nov. 

28, 1831. 

Polly d. Aug. 24, 1S09, and Zenas 
m. Betsey Porter, d. of Col. Phineas, 
May 20, 1810, and d. April 25, 1S51. 

4. Lucien Porter, b. in Salem, Mch. 18, 181 1 

5. Harriet i\L, b. Dec. 9, 1812; m. H. H. Peck. 

6. Catharine L., July 2, 1815; m. Augustus Smith. 

7. Mary Elizabeth, b. Mch. 27, 1818. 

Mary J. Cooley m. C. J. Godfrey, 1834. 

Betsey J. Cooper m. E. E. Prichard, 1827. 

Desire Cooper m. Peter Welton, 1766. 

Sary Cooper m. Samuel Frost, 1759. 

William Cooper from Eng., b. Dec. 15, 
1819, m. in New Haven, Aug. 20, 1S43, 
Elizabeth Beardslee, b. Dec. 19, 1827, 
d. of Eleazer of New Haven. 

1. John Henry, b. in New Haven, July 3, 1844. 

2. Sarah Elizabeth, 1). June 8, 1846. 

John Corcoran m. Elizabeth Neville, Jan. 
28, 1841. 

1. Margaret Elizabeth, b. Oct. 29, 1842. 

2. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 31, 1844. 

Margaret Corcoran m. Ed. Stanley, 1835. 



* Zenas Cook had thirteen grandchildren, and but two great-grandchildren : William Cook and Edward 
Elliot, sons of Celestia Cook and Ezra Haskill of New York. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP41 



Corcoran. Cowell. 

Timothy Corcoran of Ireland and Sarah 

Glover of Birm., Eng., m. Jan. 7, 1831. 

Children born in Waterbury: 

1. James, b. Jan. 7, 1833. 

2. Mary, b. Mch. 29, 1S35. 

3. Rosetta, b. Jan. 7, 1839. 

4. Sarah Ann, b. Dec. 3, 1841. 

5. Timothy, b. Dec. 29, 1S46. 

William Corcoran, d. lsia.y 9, 1841, a. 34." 

Mercy Gillett Coshier m. Henry Wooster, 
1773- 

John Cossit, s. of Ranne of Simsbury, m. 
Mary Hopkins, d. of Capt. Timothy, 
dec'd. May 13, 1760. 

1. Orpha b. June 28, 1761; m. William Adams. 

Mary, d. Jan. 11, 1765, and John m. Su- 
sanna Killum, relict of Dan., Sept. 23, 
1767. 

2. John, b. Oct. 28, 1768. 

3. Susanna, b. Oct. 26, 1770. 

4. Chauncey, 1). July 22, 1772; d. Sept. 25, 1776. 

John Cossett, Jr., s. of John, m. Rebecca 
Hine, d. of Ebenezer, June 17, 1799. 

1. Isabinda, b. Nov. 15, 1799. 

2. Almedia, b. Feb. 23, 1801. 

3. Ranney, b. May 14, 1802. 

4. Alma, b. Nov. 28, 1803. 

5. Susanna, b. May 12, 1806. 

6. Rinaldo, b. June 29, 1808. 

[Lydia Cosset d. June 26, 1S21, a. 95.] 

Mary Cosset m. Thomas Welton, 1742. 

Thomas Costly (Costello ?) m. Catherine 
McMahon, Feb. 18, 1851.^ 

William Coughlan m. Bridget Bannon, 

July 3, 1849. 

Elizabeth Co-wd m. Thomas Jones. 

William Cowd from Eng. m. LeveAnn 
Grilley, d. of Henry, Feb. 6, 1837. 



1. Sarah Jane, b. Mch. 7, 183! 

2. Leve Ann, b. Jan. 8, 1844. 

3. Harriet Elizabeth, b. Aug. 



3, 1846. 



Amasa Cowel, s. of James, m. Susanna 
Sperry, d. of Jesse, Nov. 22, 1790. 

I. Stephen Upson, b. May 29, 1791. 

Frances, wife of James, from Milford 
Church, 1 81 1.' 

Betsey Cowel m. Lyman Allen, 1831. 

Charles Cowell m. Ellen Bronson, June 
29, 1851. 

Nelson Cowell, s. of Samuel, m. Jennet 
Bronson, 1). Dec. 2, 1817. d. of Joseph 
and Polly of Prospect, Sept. 20, 1836. 

1. George Hubert, b. Mch. 25, 1840. 

2. Julia Annett, b. Aug. 20, 1843. 

Samuel Cowell, b. Oct. 4, 17S6 [s. of 
James of Milford], m. Polly Baldwin, 



Cowell. Culver. 

b. Jan. 20, 1790, d. of Josiah of Wood- 
bridge, Jan. 10, iSio. 

1. Betsey, b. Feb. 26, 1811; m. W. S. Allen. 

2. Nelson, b. Feb. 3, 1813. 

3. Mary, b. Dec. 26; d. Dec. 29, 1814. 

4. Maria, b. Dec. 29, 1815; m. Samuel Fenn. 

5. George Baldwin,' b. Apr. 9, 1818; d. July 4, 1S40. 

6. John, b. May 7, 1820. 

7. Charles, b. Oct 24. 1822. 

8. Mary Ann, b. Mch. 27, 1827. 

Q. Julia, b. Jan. 8, 1830; d. Apr., 1831. 

Stephen U. Cowel, s. of Amasa, m. Al- 
mera Selkrigg, b. Jan. 20, 1789, d. of 
Osee of Litchheld, 1814. 

1. Albert S., b. Feb. ii, iSi6. 

2. Emily Ann, b. Oct. 29, 1S17. 

3. Harriet Rebecca, b. Sept. 9, 1819. 

4. Mary Jane, b, Sept. 9. 1S21. 

5. Susan E., b. Jan. 8, 1824; m. D. Blakeslee. 

6. Nancy Adelia, b. Mch. 29, 1826. 

7. Joseph Harley, b. Mch. 23, 1828. 

8. Marcia Irena, b. Apr. 26, 1830. 

9. Ellen, b. Sept. 21, 1832. 

Ira Cowles, s. of Isaac, dec'd, of Farm- 
ington, was born May 10, 1764. 

Thomas Cranbal (?) m. Abigail Riggs, 
Jan., 1786.'' 

Crissy, see Chrisee. 

James Croft from Eng. m. Polly Carter, 
d. of Preserve of Wolcott, July 4, 1829; 
and d. June 10, 1837. 

1. Edward, b. June 16, 1830. 

2. Margarett, b. Jan. 25, 1835. 

Timothy and Mary Crosby: 

4. Molly, b. June i, 1766. 

5. Jesse, b. June 16, 1768. 

6. Thomas, b. May 2, 1770. 

[Amos Culver m. Sarah Hopkins, d. of 
John. 

Sarah, b. 1775; m. John Horton. 
Laura; m. Samuel J. Hikco.x, 1800. 
Anna. Stephen, b. 1773. 
Marshall. Clara, b. 1791; d. 1808. 

Sarah d. Nov. 24, 17S9, and Amos m. 
Sallv, wid. of Josiah Atkins. She d. 
1845". 

Susanna, b. 1794; m. Argus Beecher. 
Ransom. Josiah. J 

Hannah Culver m. James Brown, 1770. 

Mercy Culver m. Henry Grilley, 1772. 

Stephen Culver m. Eunice [Miles, d. of 
Thomas of Wallingford]. 

Thomas Miles, b. Dec. 2, 1760 [m. Hannah 

Baldwin, d. of Jonathan, and d. Dec, 1836]. 
Abigail, b. Alch. 29, 1764; ra. Jesse Frost. 
Stephen, d. Dec. 28, 1770. 
James, bap. Dec. 16, 1770. 

Eunice [b. Mch. 19, 1753I; m. Street Richards. 
Anne [b. 1768]; m. Enoch Frost. 

Stephen Culver, s. of Amos, m. Anner 
Francis, d. of Daniel of Killingworth, 



42 AP 



HI8T0BT OF WATERS UBT. 



Culver. Curtiss. 

Nov. 7, 1793. [He d. Sept. 7, 1849, a. 
76; and she, 1844.] 

1. Still-born, Nov. 23, 1793. 

2. b. and b. Feb. 11, 1795. 

3. Curtis, b. Oct. 27, 1797. 

4. Martin, b. Oct. 14, 1801; d. June 5, 1804. 

5. Hannah Weeks, b. Mch. 8, 1805. 

6. Stephen Hopkins, b. Dec. 20, 1810. 

7. Miles, b. Sept. 19, 1816. 

8. William, b. Aug. 3, i8ig. 

Sylvia Culver : ' 

Symantha Amanda, bap. June 28, 1801. 

Jane Cummings m. W. B. Gregory, 1S48. 
Mary A. Cummings m. H. B. Wolf, 1850. 

Daniel Cunningham m. Bridget Dolan, 
July, 1S46. 
I. John, b. Mch. 0, 1S47. 

Patrick Cunningham m. Mary Glynn, 
May II, 1844. 

1. Daniel, b. Dec. 11, 1845. 

2. Rosanna, b. Feb. 10, 1847. 

Abel and Freelove Curtice: 

3. David, b. Jan. 8, 1744-5. 

4. Oliver, b. Oct. 20, 1746. 

5. Free Love, b. Jan. 29, 1749-50; m. Asa Darrow. 

6. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 4, 1751. 

7. Rebeckah, b. Sept. 15, 1753. 

8. Hannah, b. Apr. 10, 1755. 

9. Abigail, b. Apr. 25, 1761. 

Adah Curtis m. Reuben Matthews, 1772. 

Ambrose Curtiss m. Sarah Hungerford, 
May 14, 1S50. 

[Lieut.] Daniel Curtice, s. of Isaac of 
Wallingford, and Lettice [Ward] his 
wife. [She d. Oct. i, 1749, a. 39; he, 
Dec. 1750, a. 43.] 

3. Jesse, b. Sept. 22, 1733. 

4. Abigail, b. Aug. 25, 1735; m. Bart. Jacobs. 

5. Luse (Lucy) b. Aug. 29, 1737; m. Bart. Pond. 

6. Lsaac, b. July 31, 1740. 

7. Sarah, b. Aug. 23, 1742. 

8. Ruth, b. Nov. 15, 1744; m. Peter Barker. 

9. Lettice, b. Nov. 6. 1746; m. Gideon Allen. 

10. Daniel, b. July 15, 1748. 

[Daniel Curtiss of Southbury m. Tryel 
Ward, Nov. 16, 1768.] 

Daniel Curtiss of Go.shen m. Phebe 
Pritehard. Nov. 25, 1S39, and d. Jan. 

11. 1S44, a. 31. 

David Curtis m. Elizabeth Hill, Apr. 20, 
1769. 

1. Zenas, b. Apr. 14, 1770. 

Ebenezer Curtiss, [eldest] s. of Daniel, 
dec'd, m. Annis, d. of Ensign John 
Warner, Jan. 23, 175 1-2. 

1. Zadock, b. Oct. 17, 1752. 

2. Daniel, b. Feb. 12, 1754. 

3. Lettis, b. Sept. 4, 1756; m. Eli Blakeslee. 

4. Mary, b. Feb. 23, 1759. 

5. Marie, b. Sept. 5, 1761. 

6. Phebe, b. Mch. 17, 1764. 

7. Thomas, b. Feb. 18, 1765. 

8. Levi, b. Sept. 10, 1768. 



Curtiss. Curtis. 

Eli Curtiss m. Mary Hopkins [d. of John] , 
Feb. 24, 1783.3 

Erioch [s. of Samuel] and Rachel Curtiss: 

3. Enoch, b. Jan. 26, 1744-5. 

4. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 5, 1748. 

Esther M. Curtis m. Bennet Scott, 1829. 

[Esther Merriam Hull Curtis m. Nathan- 
iel Barnes, 1798, Elisha Wilcox, 1799, 
and d. 1S29.] 

Gideon Curtiss m. Zerviah (Sutliff), wid. 
of Benjamin Hikcox, Apr. 8, 1810. 



1. Leva, 

and 

2. Lucius, 

3. Ira, b. Nov. 2, 181 



ib. Ju 
s, ) 



ly 18, 1811. 



[Isaac Curtiss, s. of Daniel of Isaac, m. , 
Lydia Foot, d. of Moses, Nov. 30, 1763. 
She d. Sept. 6, 1788. 

I. Joatham, b. Jan. 28, 1765.] 

James Curtis, s. of Stephen, m. Judah 
Elwell, d. of Eben, Sept. 4, 1751. 

1. Sarah, b. May 9, 1752. 

2. Hile, b. July 26, 1754; m. Oliver Curtis. 

3. Merriam, L. Nov. 11, 1756. 

4. Judah, b. Feb. 25, 1759. 

5. Aves, b. Nov. 21, 1762. 

6. James, b. June 28, 1765. 

7. Lucy, b. May 27, 1768. 

James Curtiss m. Thankful Weed, May 
20, 1779. 

Jesse Curtice, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m. Sa- 
rah Yale, d. of Elihu of Wallingford, 
Dec. 12, 1754. 

1. Elihu, b. Feb. 11, 1756. 

2. Lyman, b. May 15, 1759. 

3. Mary, b. Jan. 26, 1761; d. Dec. 1763. 

John F. and Esther Curtis: 

Sally, b. Aug. 22, 1S06. 

Jotham Curtiss, s. of Daniel, dec'd. m. 
jNlary Yale, d. of Elihu of Wallingford, 
Jan.'24, 1754. 

I. Giles, b. Oct. 28, 1754. 

[2. Sarah, h. Apr. 17, 1756]; m. Samuel Lewis, Jr. 

Jotham m. Esther, wid. of Dr. Benja- 
min Hull, 1770. 

[Mary, b. 1771; m. Linus Fenn, s. of Isaac. 
Elizabeth, b. 1773; m. Gershora Fenn, s. of Jo- 
seph.] 

Lucius Curtiss, s. of Gideon, m. Mary 
Cleveland from Goshen, Sept. 12, 1S37. 

1. Henry L., b. Nov. 9, 1838. 

2. Franklin, b. Feb. 24, 1841. 

3. Ellen L., b. June 16, 1843. 

4. Lewis C, b. May 27, 1846. 

Lydia Curtiss m. C. J. Merriam, 1S46. 
Maria Curtis m. Bennett Scott, 1829. 
Olive Curtis m. John Blakeslee, 1745. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP43 



Curtis. Curtis. 

Oliver Curtis m. Hila Curtis, Nov. 14, 
1774" 

1. Chloe, b. June 3, 1775. 

2. Freelove, b. June 24, 1777. 

3. Clarissa, b. Aug. 22, 1779. 

4. Hilas, b. Feb. 28, 1782. 

5. Cyrene, b. Nov. 27, 1784. 

6. Martha, b. Aug. 3, 1787. 

7. Oliver, b. June 25, 1789. 

Patrick Curtiss from Wolcott, b. Mch., 
1S17, m. Louisa A. Bacon from Bur- 
lington, Nov., 1839. 

1. George William, b. July 30, 1840. 

2. Emerett Louisa, b. Apr. 9, 1843. 

Phebe Curtis m. John Porter, 1770. 
Phinehas and Mary Curtis: 

1. Abigail, b. Nov. 10, 1769. 

2. Hannah, b. Jan. 28, 1772. 

3. Rebeckah, b. Dec. 23, 1774. 

4. Zenas, b. Aug. 12, 1779. 

Rosanah Curtis m. Martin Boughton, 
1830. 

Samuel Curtice, s. of Stephen, was m. to 
Dinah Clark, d. of Joseph, by the Rev. 
Mr. Samuel Todd, as he certifies. May 

8. 1740. 

1. Joseph, b. Feb. 3, 1740-1. 

2. Alice, b. Jan. 5, 1743; m. Isaac Barnes. 

3. Joseph, b. Mch. 19, 1745. 

4. Samuel, b. Feb. i, 1747. 

5. Eli, b. Feb. 10, 1748-9. 

6. Lois, b. Sept. 10, 1750; m. John Sutliff, Jr. 

7. Titus, b. Nov. 13, 1752, 

8. Benjamin, b. July 6, 1755. 

9. Dinah, b. Nov. 2, 1757. 
10. Istai, b. Mch. 25, 1760. 
Ti. Lydia, b. Apr. 12, 1764. 

Sarah Curtis:^ 

Leavee Smith, bap. June 6, 1779. 

Sarah Curtis m. Marshal L. Terril, 1S30. 

Simeon Curtis, Jr., of Southbury m. 
Hannah Bronson, May iS, 1831. 

Solomon Curtis of Southington m. Sally 
L. Cook, d. of Joseph and Anna, Jan. 
I, 1827. 

I. Sarah Emily, b. Feb. 15, 1828. 

Stephen Curtis, Jr., s. of Stephen m. 
Thankfull Royce, d. of Josiah of Wal- 
lingford, Oct. 2, 1752.* 

1. Stephen, b. July 20, 1752. 

2. Mary, b. Apr. 20, 1754. 

3. Caleb, b. Nov. 24, 1756. 

4. Josiah, b. Sept. 25, 175S. 

5. Felix, b. Dec. 9, 1761. 

6. Thankfull, b. May 27, 1763. 

William E. Curtis of New York m. Mary 
A. Scovill [d. of William H.], Sept. 2, 
1851. 

I. William Edmund, b. in New York City, June 2, 
1855. 



Curtis. Darwin. 

Zadock Curtis m. Ros.se Bacheldor, Apr. 
25, 1773, and d. 1830, a. 78.^ 

I. Annis, b. Sept. 13, 1773. 

Joseph Cutler m Dothea Judd [d. of El- 
nathan], Jan. 26, 1786.^ 

1. Sophia, b. Jan. 13, 1787. 

2. Mary, b. Oct. 10, 1780. 

Leman Woodward Cutler m. Mary E. 

Holcomb, Sept., 1S31.-' 
Younglove Cutler m. Dothea Stone, Dec. 
16, I7S4.S 
I. Anne Bishop, b. Mch. 23, 1786. 

James Madison Daggett of Massachu- 
setts m. Mabel Hall, Sept. 4, 1831. 

Nancy Daggett m. Bennet Bronson, 
1S41. 

Justice Daily, s. of John of Colchester 
m. Lydia Judd, d. of Stephen, dec'd, 
July 12, 1767. / ,• - 

1. Elijah, b. Oct. 22, 1757. 

2. Eliel, b. Sept. 9, 1769. 

3. John, b. July 30, 1771; d. June 22, 1778. 

4. [ephthah, h. July 25, 1773. 

5. Wheeler, b. Oct. 18, 1775. 
fi. John, b. Apr. 26, 1778. 

7. Sarah, Ij. Apr. 3, 1780. 

Amelia Daines m. W. B. Frost, 1846. 
Julia A. Daniels m. Willis Upson, 1S48. 
Asa Darrow: 

Junia, a son, b. May 12, 1772.3 

Asa Darrow m. Freelove Curtis, Oct. 29, 

1772. [She d. Dec. 14, 1773, a. 24 ] 
Asa and Lydia Darrow:-^ 

1. Martha, b. Feb. 15, 1775. 

2. Lydia, b. Dec. 13, 1779. 

3. Lucy, b. Mch. 12, 1781. 

4. Asa, b. Jan. 11, 17S3. 

5. Andrew Storrs, b. Mch. 3, 1785. 

6. Rosalba, b. Mch. 19, 1787. 

7. Freelove, b. Sept. 17, 1789. 

Eunice Darrow m. John Warner the 
third, 1779. 

Jemiah Darrow m. Benjamin Barnes, 
1766. 

John L. Darro'w of New London m. Eliz- 
abeth H. Gray, Sept. 28, 1848. 

Mary J. Darrow: see Wooster Warner. 

Titus Darrow m. Anna Hill, Jan. 17, 17S0. 
She d. Sept. 19, 1788. 

1. Ammi, b. Dec. 25, 1780.^ 

2. Erastus, b. Jan. 12, 1782. 

3. Phnv, b. May 23, 1784. 

4. Hili; b. Sept. 19, 1788. 

William and Ruth Dart:^ 

Esther, b. Feb. 23, 1780. 

Samuel and Thankful Darwin: 

3. Amasa, b. July 6, 1744. 

4. Samuel, b. i\pr. 6, 1746. 

5. Lois, b. Feb. 21, 1747-8. 



* This was the year, it will be remembered, when the change from Old Style to New Style took place, and 
the new year began Jan. ist. 



44 Ap 



BISTORT OF WATEBBUBT. 



Daverin. Dayton. 

John and Jane Daverin: 

John, li. Jan. ig, 1741-2. 

Eunice R. Davies m. W. H. Scovill, 1827. 

Lemuel Sanford Davies of New Haven 

m. Stella Maria Scovill [d. of Edward], 

Sept. 14, 1847. 
Abel H. Davis m. Sarah Benham of Mid- 

dlebury, May i, 1S50. 
Ann Davis m. W. Davis Luckn(?), 1844. 
Edward Davis m. Ann Farrell — both of 

Naugatuck— Apr. 29, 185 1. 
Emerett Davis m. Harrison Tomlinson, 

1 84 1. 
Emily Davis m. Constant L. Adams, 

1S30. 
Hannah Davis m. Richard Welton, 1770. 

Louisa Davis m. Noble Leavenworth, 

1S24. 
Lucy Davis m. Benajah Bryan, 1780.^ 
Lucy Davis m. Hart E. Hubbell, 1848. 
Marietta Davis m. N. W. Morgan, 183S. 

Morris Davis was m. to Hannah Doolit- 
tle, d. of Thomas, by Rev. Mr. Richard 
Mansfield, June 3, 1753. 

1. Mary, b. Apr. i, 1754. 

2. Margaret, b. Sept. 20, 1756. 

3. Hannah, b. May 7, 1759. 

4. Cattern, b. Sept. 3, 1751 (1761). 

5. Ann, b. Aug. 18, 1764. 

6. Thomas, b. Sept. 13, 1767. 

Rhoda Davis m. Charles Demorest, 1846. 

Sarah M. Davis m. Asa A. Yale, 1S50. 

Thomas Benedict Davis, b. Jan. 5, 1819. 
from Dutchess Co., N. Y., and Emeline 
H. Gunn, b Jan. 1, 1S22, from Water- 
town, m. Apr. 12, 1840. 

I. Edward Franklin, b. Dec. 24, 1845. 

Henry Mills Day, s. of Rev. Henry N., 

was b. Oct. 20, 183S. 
John Daye m. Margaret Smyth— both of 

Terryville— Jan. 7. 1S50. 
Charles Dayton, s. of Capt. Michael, m. 

Sene (Asenath) Gernsey, d. of David, 

Sept. 30, 1773. 

1. Pliment, b. Oct. 17, 1774- 

2. Charles, b. Sept. 17, 1776. 

3. Polle, b. Nov. II, 1778. 

4. Roxana, b. Mch. 17, 1781.3 

5. Chauncey, b. Mch. i, 1783. 

6. Matthew, b. Apr. 17, 1785. 

7. John Guernsey, b. Apr. 4, 1787. 

David Dayton, s. of Michael, m. Eliza 
beth Welton, d. of Peter, Mch. 25, 1773. 

1. Betty, b. Nov. 3, 1774. 

2. David, b. Feb. 29; d. Dec. 30, 1777 (1776?). 
3 Sal, b. Dec. 2, 1778. 

4. David, b. Dec. 3, 1781.8 

5. Daniel, b. June i, 1784. 

6. Olive, 1). Jan. 9, 1787. 

7. Abigail, b. Oct. 15, 1789. 



Dayton. Denney. 

Justus Dayton m. Hannah Titus, July 
10, 1777.^ 

1. Spencer, b. Oct. 21, 1778. 

2. Russell, b. Sept. 9, 1780. 

3. Rhoda, b. June 19, 1782. 

4. Jonah, b. July 31, 1783. 

5. Mehitable, b. Sept. 23, 1785. 

6. Beulah, b. Feb. 20, 1787. 

Lyman Dayton m. Abiah Matthews, July 
26, 1787.^ 

I. William, b. Feb. 24, 1788. 

Michael Dayton, s. of Isaac of New 
Haven, m. Mehitable Doolittle, d. of 
Samuel of Wallingford, Jan. 29, 1746-7. 

1. Charles, b. Nov. 3, 1747. 

2. David, Id. July 23, 1749. 

3. Mirriam, b. Jan. 26, 1751. 

4. Michael, b. Sept. "11, 1752. 

5. Justice, b. June 9, 1754. 

6. Mehittable, b. Sept. ii, 1756; m. Samuel Sey- 

mour. 

7. Lowly, b. Mch. 21, 1758. 

8. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 16, 1759; m. Aniasa Mattoon. 

9. Isaac, b. ^lay 30, 1761. 

10. Samuel, b. Sept. 27, 1762. 

II. Lyman, b. Aug. 27, 1764. 
12. Olive, b. Feb. 6, 1766. 

James Dean m. Mary Biroy, Sept. i, 1851. 

Samuel S. DeForest m. Huldah Hitch- 
cock, May 1 8, 1S35. 

Finton Delany m. Maria Blakesley, Feb. 
20, 1849. 

James Delaney m. Eliza Bowe, June 4, 

1851.8 
John Delaney m. Bridget Doolan, July 

11, 1851." 

Matthew Delany m. Bridget Parker, Oct. 
23, 1844. 

1. Catharine, b. Aug. 4, 1845. 

2. Martin, b. Apr. 18, 1847. 

Patrick Delany and Mary Delany were 
m. in New Haven, Apr. 8, 1837. 

I. John Thomas, b. Feb. 11, 1838. 

Patrick Delaney m. Mary Finch (?), Nov. 
26, 1849. 

Thomas Delany from Ireland m. Char- 
lotte Denny from New Preston, Aug , 

1839- 

I. Mary, b. Sept. 6, 1S40. 

William Delaney m. Julia Doolen, May 

23. 1S48. 
Tryphena Delano m. Silas Grilley, iSoo. 

Horace Deming of Woodbury m. Almira 

Amanda Stoddard, Nov. 23, 1831. 
Charles Demorest m. Rhoda S. Davis, 

Nov. I, 1S46. 
William Denair ni. Catharine Connor, 

June 21, 1848. 
George W. Denney m. Mary Smith, Feb. 

14, 1847. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



ap45 



Dermott. Doolittle. 

James W. Dermott m. Mary Cook— both 
of Plymouth— Feb. i6, 1S51. 

Michael Devrick m. Alice Denair, Feb. 

20, 1S4S. 
William Dick of Bytown, Canada West, 

m. Maria L. Baldwin of Naugatuck, 

May II, 1845. 
Charlotte Dickerman m. Nathan Piatt, 

lS2i). 

William Dickinson of Saybrook m. Maria 

A. Chapman of Berlin, Mch. 17, 1840. 
James Dillon m. Ann Garvey in Ireland. 

I. Francis, li. in Ireland, Aug., 1S41. 

Charity Dixson m. Samuel Hikcox. 176S. 

Phebe Dodd d. Feb. 27, 1815.^ 

Patrick Doherty m. Margaret Cassian— 
both of Watertown— July 15, 1S49. 

Michael Donahue m. Bridget Coyle in 
New Haven, July 7, 1839. 

1. Thomas, b. May 20, 1840. 

2. Michael, b. in Wisconsin, Sept. 16, 1844. 

3. Ellen, b. Dec. 16, 1846. 

Thomas Donahue m. Christiana Riley in 
Ireland, Oct., 1S44. 

1. Rarney, b. Nov. i, 1845. 

2. Rosetta, b. Mch. 8, 1847. 

Cornelius Donnelly m. Rachel Elizabeth 
Lowry in Ireland, 1S26. 

James, b. Feb. 8, 1S34. 
Mary Ellen, b. Feb. 16, 1837. 

Cornelius d. July, 1840, and his wid. m. 
Terrence McCaffrey, May, 1841. 

Michael Donnelly m. Ann Donnelly, 
Sept. 23, 1 85 1. 

John Doolan m. Maria Fitzsimmons, July 
22, 1S51. 

Abel Doolittle, s. of Samuel, m. Thank- 
full Moss, d. of John— all of Walling- 
ford— Mch. 19, 1744-5. [He d. 1765.] 

1. Mary, b. Jan. 28, 1746-7; m. Jon. Scott. 

2. Thankfull, b. June i, 1749; m. Lot Osborn. 

3. John, b. Jan. 31, 1750. 

4. Jerusha, h. Dec. 13, 1752. 

5. Melees, b. Jan. 22, 1755. 

6. Abel, b. Dec. 2, 1757. 

7. Abi, b. Mch. g, 1760. 

8. Uri, b. Sept. 13, 1762. 

Mary, mother of Abel d. Dec. 20. 1760. 

Abraham Doolittle's three children d. 

1800-1807.-' 
Alfred Doolittle of Prospect m. Elizabeth 

T. Baldwin at Prospect, Dec. 24, 1843. 

Benajah Hall Doolittle m. Susanna 
Blakeslee, d. of Eben., Nov. 17, 1785. 

1. Nancy, b. Aug. i, 1786. 

2. Amzi, b. Aug. 18, 1788. 

3. Alford, b. Dec. 12, 1791. 



Doolittle. Doolittle. 

Eliasaph Doolittle m. Mabel Potter, Apr. 

8, 1776. 

I. Miles, b. Feb. 16, 1777. 
Potter, b. July lo, i7S4.'l 
Sarah, b. Mch. 20, 1786. 
Amzi, b. Feb. 21, 1788. 

Elizabeth Doolittle m. Obed Williams, 

1776. 
Enos and Mary Doolittle: 

3. Enos, b. May 17, 1751. 

4. Obed, b, Apr. 12, 1753. 

Esther Doolittle m. Jacob Foot, 1766. 

Eunice Doolittle m. Amos Fenn, 1766. 

Hannah Doolittle m. Morris Davis, 1753. 

James Doolittle, s. of Thomas, m. Dinah 
Welton, d. of Stephen and Deborah, 
Dec. 29, 1756. She d. Sept. 10, 1757, and 
James m. Sarah Andrus, d. of William, 
June 19, 175S. 

1. Dinah, b. Apr. 2, 1750; m. Josiah Seymour. 

2. Thomas, b. May 12, 1761. 

3. Sarah, b. July 12, 1763. 

Jerusha Doolittle m. Barnabas Lewis, 

1752. 
Jesse A. Doolittle of Hamden m. Mary 

Ann Todd of Bethany, Dec. 24, 1834. 
Jesse J. Doolittle, s. of Obed of Wolcott, 

m. Eunice Frost, d. of Enoch, Mch. 24, 

1S30. 

1. Mary Ann, b. Nov. 3, 1832; d. Sept. 28, 1847. 

2. Elmore Green, b. Oct. 29, 1835. 

3. Sarah Jane, b. Aug. 27, 1837. 

4. Dana Elliot, b. Sept. 8, 1842. 

5. Emily Lizette, b. Feb. 17, 1845. 

Lyman Doolittle:^ 

Enos Blakeslee, bap. Oct. 15, 1820. 

Mehitable Doolittle m. Michael Dayton, 

174^'. 
Mehitable Doolittle m. Abraham Norton, 

1766. 
Samuel Doolittle, s. of Mr. Thomas, m. 

Eunice Cole, d. of Thomas, Apr. 4, 1765. 

1. David b. Jan. 20, 1766. 

2. Benjamin, b. Oct. 31; d. Dec. 8, 1767. 

3. Benjamin, b. Oct. 25, 1769. 

4. Mary, b. Apr. 26, 1772; d. June 17, 1774. 

5. Joseph, b. Sept. 27, 1774. 

Selim Doolittle, s. of Obed, m. Amanda 
Tuttle of Woodbury, May 23, 1836. 

1. Luzerne B., b. Nov. 23, 1837. 

2. Charles A., b. Sept. 2, 1839. 

Seymour Doolittle of Bristol m. Minerva 

E. Pitkin, Apr. 16, 1846. 
Thankful Doolittle m. Jon. Fulford, 1764. 
Thomas Doolittle and Hannah [Fenn]: 

6. Samuel, b. Apr. 14, 1744. 

7. David, b. Apr. 2:;, 1746. 
Ann; m. David Wooster, 1762. 
Cattern; m. Jonathan Roberts, 1765. 

Hannah d. Sept. 9, 1760, and Thomas 
m. Sarah Hungerford, wid. of David, 
Apr. 31, 1761. 



46 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBUBT. 



DoRAN. Downs. 

Michael Doran m. Bridget Brophy, June 

Leonard L. Dougal (?) of New Haven m. 

Emerett A. Scovill, Nov. 24, 1831. 
Abigail Douglass m. David Hotchkiss, 

1763- 
Alexander Douglass m. Anne Scott, Jan. 

20, 1767. 
Julia Douglass ni. W. B. Barrows, 1S32. 
Elizabeth Dowd m. Daniel Clark, 1759. 
Honor Dowd m. Nathaniel Merrills, 17S1. 
Jacob and Mary Dowd: 

12. Elizabeth, b. Nov. 9, 1761. 

Their 6th child, EHzalieth, d. Oct. lo, 1761. 

Mary Dowd m. Ambrose Hikcox, 1762. 
Rebecca Dowdm. Thomas Foot, Jr., 1762. 
James S. Downey d. Mch. 4, 1.^35. a. 37.'- 
Martin Downey m. Jane Wheelan. Apr 

10, 1S49. 
Michael Downey m. Catharine Lynch 

fnjm L^eland, Jan., 1S45. 

I. James, b. Jan. 24, 1846. 

Ann Downs m. David Sprague, 1S2S. 
Anson Downs, b. Sept. 1798, s. of David, 

m. Oct. 26, 1S23, Eveline Welton, b. 

Jan. 23, iSoo, d. of Thomas. 

1. Thomas L., b. July q, 1824. 

2. Elmore Lucius, b. Oct. 18, 1S26. 

3. Mary Ellen, b. Nov. 30, 1829. 

4. William Wallace, b. Jan. 25, 1835. 

5. John Frederic, b. June 26, 1837. 

6. Dwight Mortimer, b. July 23, 1839. 

David Edson Downs, s. of John, m. Jen- 
net Morehouse from Wash., Nov., 1S37. 

I. John Benjamin, b. June i, 1845. 

Elizabeth Downs m. Nathaniel Gunn, 
Jr., 1763. 

Elizabeth Downs m. Jeremiah Camp. 
1S23. 

Elmira Downs m. John Woodruff, 1S32. 

Franklin Downs of Bristol m. Emeline 
I\L Upson Nov. 4, 1S44. 

Harley Downs m. Leonoi^a Welton — both 
of Wolcott— Apr. 2, 1S26. 

John Downs, b. July 28, 17S3, s. of Da- 
vid, m. 1S05, Harriet Tolles from Wood- 
bridge, b. Dec., 17S5. 

1. Caroline, b. June i, 1806; m. Josepli Webb. 

2. Willard, b. Dec. 28, 1808. 

■3. Julia Abigail, b. May 6, 1811; m. Dennis Prich- 
ard. 

4. David Edson, b. July 14, 1S13. 

5. Polly Hubbard, b. 'July 6, 1816; m. Berlin 

Thomas. 

6. Ann Eliza, b. Nov. 24, 1818. 

7. Harriet Cornelia, b. Sept. 17, 1821; m. (I. H. 

Newel. 

8. Mary Amelia, b. Feb. 10, 1824. 

9. John, b. Dec. 31, 1826; d. Nov. 16, 1828. 
ID. Marvin John, b. Oct. 12, 1830; d. 1831. 



Downs. Dunbar. 

Mille Downs m. vShelden Smith, 1825. 
Sarah Downs m. Samuel Cook, 1835. 
Susan Dow^ns m. Jesse Scott, 1811. 

Willis Downs m Martha Sparry — both 

of Westville — Apr. i, 1845. 
William M. Drake from Bridge water. 

Mass , 1). Jan. 9, 180S, m. Ann Bronson, 

d. of Selah, Aug. 22, 1S30. 

1. Emily E., b. June 27, 1831. 

2. Cornelia A., b. Feb. 6, 1833. 

3. Martha M., b. July 30, 1834. 

4. William Franklin, b. Sept. i, 1840. 

The wife of William above-named, d. 
Oct. 24, 1S40. The second wife, Laura, 
d. Mch. 1S47. When they were m., 
Mch. 31, 1845, she was the widow of 
George Guilford. Her original name 
was Laura Rice. 

John Dudley m. Welthy E. Post, Dec. 25, 
iS39- 

Mary Dudley m. Nans Blakley, 1829. 

Polly Dudley m. Lemuel Atwater, 1S14. 
John Duff m. Bridget Farman, 1850. 
Aaron Dunbar m. Mary Potter [d. of Dan- 
iel], ]\Ich. 26, 1773. 

, I Daniel, b. Mch. 28, 1774. 

2. Mary, b. May 26, 1776. \ 

3. Aaron, b. Mch. 2, 1779. 

4. Asaph, b. Sept. i, 1780. 

5. Keturah, b. Nov. 4, 1782. 

6. Lvman. b. Jan. 18, 1785. 

7. Hall, b. Nov. 15, 1786. 

Clarissa Dunbar m. G. E. Ellis, 1840. 
Dinah Dunbar m. Joel Cook, 176S. 
Edward Dunbar, record of chil.: 

1. Mary, 1). Sept. 21, 1754. . 

■2. Sarah, b. June 9, 1750; m. Lent Parker. 

3. Jiles Curtis, b. Apr. 26, 1758. 

4. Avis, b. May 7, 1760. 

5. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 4, 1761. 

6. Content, b. Oct. 15, 1763. 

7. Eunice, b. Oct. 14, 1765. 

Emily Dunbar m. C. P. Lindsley, 1S43. 
Eunice Dunbar m. Victory Tomlinson, 

1785.^ 
Frederick Dunbar m. Axa Ames, Oct. i, 

JS24. 
Hannah Dunbar m. Moses Blakeslee, 1753. 
John Dunbar and Temperance [Hall, m. 

in Wallingford, 1743, where they had 

ten children]: 

Children that were b. in Wat. 

1. John, b. Oct. 28, 1760. 

2. Charity, b. Feb. 20, 1763. 

3. Ade, b. Feb. 28, 1765. 

4. Mollv, b. Jan. 5, 1767. 

5. David, 1 

and >b. May 26, 1770. 

6. Jonathan, | 

and their mother d. the same day. John 
Dunbar d. Oct. 4, 1786.^ 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



ap47 



Dunbar. Dutton. 

Lucina Dunbar m. Thomas Painter, i ySv.'* 

Mary Dunbar m. Ebenezer Elwell, 1745, 

and Stephen Seymour, 1767. 
Miles Dunbar m. Tryphosa Butler, May 

3. 1779- 

1. Isaiah, b. June 4, 1781. 

2. John, b. Feb. 23, 1784. 

3. Miles, b. Feb. 26, 17S6. 

Olive Dunbar m. Thomas Fancher, 1765. 
William B. Dunbar from Bristol, b. June 

28, iSii. m. Jan. 4, 1S3S, Mary Merrill, 

b. Feb. 5, 1820, d. of Jared. 

1. Hannah E., b. in Bristol, Apr. 28, 1836. 

2. Eraely Henrietta, b. Nov. 26, 1839. 

3. Lucy Ann, b. July 10, 1841. 

4. Leontine Genevra, b. Oct. 12, 1843. 

5. Charles, b. June 27, 1847. 

Esther Dunk m. Nathan Saunders, i777-'' 
Patrick Dunn m. Johanna Clery, July 

14, 1S50. 
Jared D. Durand of Meriden m. Lucy E. 

Roberts, Oct. 13, 1849. 
John G. Duryee d. Aug. 7, 1840, a. 46. 
[Aaron Dutton, s. of Thomas, m. Dorcas 

Southmayd, d. of Samuel, Apr., 1806. 

He d. June, 1849; she, Sept. 17, 1841. 

Mary, b. Nov., 1807; Founder of "Grove Hall 

Seminary," New Haven. 
Dorcas S., b. Jan., 1810. 
Samuel, b. Mch., 1812. 
Samuel W. S., b. Mch. 14, 1814; Rev. S. W. S. 

Dutton of the North Church, New Haven. 
Aaron, b. July, 1816. 
John Southmayd, b. July, 1818; d. 1S34. 
Anna, b. 1820; d. 1831. 
Matthew Henry, b. 1822; d. 1841.] 

Ambros Dutton, s. of David, m. Eliza- 
beth Peck, d. of Samuel, Feb. 27, 1754. 

Amos Dutton, s. of David, m. Thankful 
Humastone, Oct. 25, 1764. 

A son, b. Feb. 8; d. Feb. 16, 1768. 

Thankful d. Feb. 22, 176S, and Amos 
m. Sarah Turner, Nov. 3, 1769. 

2. Enos, b. July 31, 1770. 

3. Jesse, b. Apr. 27, 1772. 

4. Lucy, b. Nov. 2, 1774. 

5. Ransom, b. Feb. 22, 177S. 

Dameris Dutton m. Daniel How, 1763. 
David and Judith Dutton: 

14. Titus, b. Dec. 21, 1749. 

Elizabeth Dutton m. Daniel Allcox, 1759. 

Eunice Dutton m James Warner, 1761. 

Joel Dutton, s. of David, m. the wid. 
Hannah Bull, d. of Ezekiel Sanford, 
Feb. 16, 1762. 

I. Moses, b. Oct. 16, 1762. 
Dr. Osee Dutton m. Elizabeth Trow- 
bridge, Jan. 19, 1783.^ 
Huldah, bap. Oct. 11, 1786. 

Polly Dutton m. Chauncey Root, 1S23. 



Dutton. 
Thomas Dutton: 



Eggleston. 
Chil. b. in Wat. 



Reuben, b. in Wal. Feb. 21, 1757. 
Reuben, b. Mch. 28, 1758. 
Thomas, b. Mch. 31, 1760. 
Matthew, b. May 14, 1762. 
[Hannah, Keziah, and Rice d. young. 
Hannah, b. Sept. 13, 1776. 
Aaron, b. May 26, 1780.] 

Thomas Dutton, 3d, m. Tenty Punder- 

son, Sept. 5, 1782.^ 

1. Matthew Royce, b. June 30, 17S3. 

2. Chester, b. July 2, 1785. 

Samuel Earls, s. of John of East Hamp- 
ton on Long Island, m. Mary Welton, 
d. of John. 

1. Samuel, b. June 28, 173S. 

2. Rhoda, b. Oct. 16, 1740. 

Cor^jelia Easton m. Leander Andrews, 

1S51. 

Lieut. Eaton d. May 10, 1S28, a. 24. 

William Eaves, Jr., m. Melissa Payne of 
Hartford, Nov. 23, 1835. 

Samuel Edmonds d. Jan. 6, 1836, a. 36.^ 

Isaac Edwards m. Esther Foot, June 26, 

17S6.3 

I. Betsey, b. Apr. 23, 1789. 

Julia Edwards m. Isaac B. Castle, 1S23. 
Nathaniel and Margit Edwards: 

1. John, b. 5, 1750; d. Oct. 31, 1770. 

2. Josiah, b. Aug. 25, 1752. 

3. Joseph, b. Aug. 24, 1754. 

4. Mercy, b. Apr. 18, 1758. 

5. Isaac, b. Sept. 30; d. Dec. 27, 1761. 

Nathaniel d. Mch. 20, 1768. 
[Probate rec. gives also, Nathaniel, 
Margaret Scott (w. of Woolsey), Abi- 
gail Blake, Eunice and Asahel.] 

Nathaniel Edwards, Jr., s. of Nathaniel, 
m. Abiah Strickland, d. of David, Mch. 
II, 1762. 

1. Lois Beadles, b. June 27, 1762; d. June 22, 1775. 

2. Isaac, b. June 29, 1764. 

3. Sarah, b. June 28, 1766. 

4. David, b. Mch. i, 1769. 

5. Lucy, b. Aug. 31, 1771. 

6. Millea, b. Mch. 21, 1774. 

7. Lois, b. Dec. 19, 1777. 

John, b. Dec. 7, 1783; d. Feb. 16, 1784.3 

Esther Eelles m. Jared Terrell, 17S1. 

Mary Elles m. Absolom Tinker, 1780. 

Stephen .<4f/eM(Egan)m. Margaret Grales 
in Ireland, 1837. 

1. Bridget, b. Dec. 16, 1840. 

2. Catharine, b. Dec. 24, 1S44. 

3. Ellen, b. Mch. 16, 1847. 

James and Ruth Eggleston: 

Lydia, b. Nov. 16, 1773. 
Anna, b. Sept. 5, 1775. 
James, b. Oct. 13. 1777.3 
Roswell, b. Oct. 18, 1779. 
Prosper, b. Sept. 30, 1781. 



48 -^P 



HISTORY OF WATERBUBY. 



Egleston. Elton. 

John and Sarah Egleston: 

1. Grove, b. June 20, 1773. / 

2. Ambrus, b. Dec. 8, 1774. 

3. Salley, b. Jan. i, 1777. 

4. John, b. July 12, 1778. 

John Eggleston of New Milford m. 
Sarah Softly, Mch. 2, 1S51. 

Lydia Elderkin m. George A. Russell, 
1S43. 

Rev. Henry B. Elliot, Pastor of the Con- 
gregational Church and Society, s. of 
Daniel, Esq., of New York, m. Martha 
A. Skinner, d. of Rev. Thomas H., 
D.D., of New York City, Oct. 24, 1843. 

I. Henry Augustus, b. Mch. 15, 1845. 

Mrs. Darwin Ellis d. Oct. 25, 1S46, a. 40.^ 
Frederick A. Ellis m. July Martin of 

Woodbridge, Feb. 11, 1828. 
George O. Ellis from Attleborough, 
Mass., m. Clarissa Dunbar from Ply- 
mouth, Apr. I, 1840. 

I. Josephine, b. Jan. 4, 1841. 

Susan Ellis m. Ephraim Roberts, 1821. 

William Ellis from Attleborough, Mass., 
b. June 2, 1S08, m. Mch. 30, 1845, Jus- 
tina Abbott from Middlebury, b. Apr. 
28, 1828 [d. of David and Hannah]. 

I. Frances Adelia, b. Apr. i8, 1846. 

Ebenezer Elton [b. 1712, s. of Ebenezer 
of Branford, m. Hannah Ward of Mid- 
dletown, where he resided. 

1. Recompense, b. Mch. 3, 1736. 

2. Ebenezer, b. Fel). 20, 1738. 

3. Mary, b. Dec, 1739. 

4. Patience, b. Feb. 10, 1744. 

5. Dr. James, b. Apr. 20, 1746 (paid taxes in Wa- 

terbury, 176S-74). 

6. William, b. Aug. 2, 1748. 

7. Richard, b. Sept. 29, 1750; d. young. 

8. Elizabeth; d. in infancy. 

Hannah d. 1754, and Ebenezer m. Han- 
nah Bacon of Middletown, Jan. 23, 1755. 

9. Dr. John, b. Oct. 6, 1755; m. Lucy Prince, and 

d. iSoo. His son, Dr. Samuel, b. Sept. 6, 1780. 
10. Elizabeth, b. Dec, 1756. 

II. Richard; d. in infancy. 

12. Rhoda, b. Nov. 26, 1750. 

13. Benjamin, b. Apr. 8, 1761. 

14. Hannah; d. in infancy. 

15. Lucy, b. Jan. 29, 1764. 

16. Nathan Noah; d. in infancy. 

17. Hannah, b. July, 1770. 

18. Richard; d. in infancy. 

19. Esther, b. Dec. 9, 1775.] 

20. Nathan Noah, b. July 12, 1782.8 

John P. Elton, s. of Dr. Samuel of Water- 
town, m. Olive Hall, d. of Capt. Moses, 

May 18, 1835. 

1. Lucy E., b. Apr. 16, 1837. 

2. James Samuel, b. Nov. 7, 1838. 

3. Charles Prince, b. Aug. 17, 1840; d. Apr. 12, 

1845. 

4. John Moses, b. Mch. 19, 1845. 

Lemuel W. Elton m. Statira Gibburd, 
Sept S, 1830 



Elwell. Fairchild. 

Ebenezer and Catharine Elwell: 

8. Ann, b. Dec. 5, 1733. 

9. Samuel, b. Apr. 27, 1736. 
Sarah, d. Dec. 25, 1743. 

Catharine d. Jan. 9, 1743, and Ebenezer 
m. Hannah Scott, d. of Edmund, July 
17, 1744. He d. Dec. 24, 1753 and Han- 
nah m. John How, 1754. [Other chil- 
dren were: Ebenezer, Jonathan, Catha- 
rine, m. A. Ludington, Judith, m. James 
Curtis, and Lydia, m. Nathaniel 
Barnes.] 

Ebenezer Elwell, s. of Eben., m. Ruth 
Moss, d. of Solomon of Wal., Nov. 20, 
1741. She d. Apr. 13, 1743, and 
Ebenezer m. Mary Dunbar, d. of John of 
Wallingford, Sept. 24, 1745. He d. Jan. 
14, 1767; his wid. m. Stephen Seymour. 

Samuel Elwell, s. of Ebenezer, dec'd, m. 
Hannah Francher, d. of William, June 
14, 1755- 

1. Sarah, b. Dec. g, 1756; d. July, 1760. 

2. Ebenezer, b. Nov. 6, 1758. 

3. Sarah, b. Feb. 9, 1761. 

4. Ozias, b. Mch. 7, 1763. 

John Enderton of Litchfield m. Nancy 
Warner, d. of Ard, May 2, 1S30. 

Charles L. English of New Haven m. 
Minerva Bronson, July 15, 1840. 
Charles m. his second wife, Sarah Bron- 
son, Apr. 3, 1844. 

Maria English m. George Gilbert, 1839. 

Lucy Essex m. Edward J. Fuller, 1851. 

Mercy Evans m. Samuel Todd, 1739. 

Oliver Evans of Sherman m. Harriet 
Adams of Salem Bridge, Jan. 15, 1S33. 

Randol and Phebe Evans: 

2. Luce, b. Mch. 2, 1755. 

3. Arad, b. Apr. i, 1757; d. Sept. 23, 1762. 

3. Rocettee, b. Mch. 15, 1759. 

4. Mary, b. June 8, 1761. 

5. Cloe, b. Dec 2, 1763. 

[Capt. Randol d. Mch. 24, 1778, a. 50; 
his wife, Jan. 19, 1778, a. just 46 yrs.] 

George Faber m. Sarah Frisbie, Jan. i, 

1S51. 
James Fagan m. Margaret Kelly, June 

22, 184S. 
Abiel Fairchild, Jr., m. Hannah Chat 

field, Feb. 23, 1757." 
Edmund B. Fairchild of Watertown m. 

Martha J. Leavenworth, May 7, 1S51. 
Joseph Fairchild, s. of Abial of Derby, 

m. Huldah Porter, d. of James, Feb. 23, 

1757. He d. Dec. i, 1757, and Huldah 

m. D. Taylor. 

I. Joseph, b. Dec. g, 1757. 

Joseph Fairchild of Oxford m. Hannah 
Wheeler of Derby, Nov. 9, 1780.* 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP49 



Fairchild. Farrell. 

Ruth Fairchild m. S. Buckingham, 17S5. 
John Fairclough, s. of Joseph, m. La- 

vinia Osborn, d. of Daniel of Nauga- 

tuck, Feb. 17, 1S43. 

I. Elizabeth Susanna, b. Maj' 24, 1S45. 

Joseph Fairclough m. Elizabeth Mills — 
both from Birm., Eng. — Oct. i, 1S17. 

1. John, b. Apr. 10, 1818. 

2. Mary, b. Jan. 28, 1821 [m. D. Boyce andj L. L. 

Russell. 

3. Susanna, b. Jan. 24, 1823; d. Aug. 4, 1S47 — all 

born in Birmingham. 

4. Charles, b. in New York, Feb. 17, 182S. 

5. Thomas, b. Feb. 11, 183 1. 

6. Joseph, b. Sept. 6, 1833. 

7. Matthew, b. Mch., iS^s; cl. Sept. 25, 1836. 

8. James, b. Mch. 11, 1S37. 

Susanna Fairclough m. Thomas Boys, 

1S44. 
Hannah Francher m. Sam. Elwell, 1755. 
Ithiel Fauncher m. Mary Hull, Nov. 24, 

1774- 
James Fancher, originally of Stratford, 

m. Mary Scott, d. of Obadiah, Mch. 18, 

1762. 

1. Sarah, b. Sept. 11; d. Oct. 30, 1763. 

2. David, b. Oct. 7, 1765. 

3. Sarah, b. Oct. 11, 1767; d. Apr. 24, 1783. 

4. Salvenus, b. July 14, 1770. 

5. Mary, b. May 23, 1773. 

6. James, b. Ian. 17, 1776. 

7. Cloe, b. Mch. 26, 1778. 
Sarah, b. July 8, 1783.8 
William, b. Aug. iS, 1785. 

Lemuel Fancher m. Sarah Loomis, June 

I, i77y.-' 
Thomas Fancher m. Olive Dunbar, July 

30, 1765. 

1. Adin, b. June 22, 1766. 

2. Thomas, b. May 15, 176S [killed by the fall of a 

tree, 1791, at Kirlland, N. Y.]. 

3. Olive, b. May 10, 1770. 

4. Eneas, b. May 2, 1772. 

William and Thankful Francher: 

11. Ithiel, b. Mch. 29, 1748. 

12. Veal, b. Sept. 21, 1751; d. May 11, 1734. 
Samuel, d. Jan. 8, 1753. 

Ebenezer, d. Aug. 18, 1758. 

Thankful, wife of William, d. Aug. 19, 
1759, and William d. the next day. 

William Fancher, s. of William, m. Eliza- 
beth Luddenton, d. of William, Apr. 5, 

1755- 

1. Reufus, b. Aug. 25, 1757. 

2. Deborah, b. Mch. 15, 1759. 

3. Samuel, b. Jan. g, 1762. 

Almon Farrel, s. of Zebah, and Emma 
Warner, b. Aug. 30, 1S08, d. of Mark, 
m. May i, 1826. 

1. FranWin, b. Feb. 17, 1S28. 

2. Juliette, b. Mch. 18, 1830. 

3. Margarett, b. Sept. 20, 1834. 

4. Malvina, b. Feb. 15, 1S37. 

5. Elizabeth, b. May 20, 1839. 

f\ Frances Elinor, b. July 10, 1844. 

Ann Farrell m. Edward Davis, 1851. 
6* 



Farrell. Fenn, 

Asa Farrell of Prospect m. Ann Seely, 

Sept. S, 1S41. 
[Benjamin Farrel, b. 1753, and Lois 

Williams, b. 1755, were m. Dec. 15, 

1775. She d. Jan. 11, 1S02. 

1. Zebah, b. Oct. 7, 1776. 

2. Lucy, b. Feb. 17, 1778; m. Joseph Nichols. 

3. Lowly, 1). Mch. 16, 1783. 

4. Lois, b. July 20, 1785; m. Silas Payne. 

5. Benjamin, b. Dec. 5, 1788. 

6. Polly, b. Jan. 11, 1797.] 

Benjamin Farrell, s. of Benjamin, m. 
Levee Frost, d. of Rev. Jesse, and d. 
Oct. 26. 183S. 

1. Chloe Ursula, b. Ian. 4, 1S12; m. M. C. Wedge. 

2. Polly Selina, b. Mch. 4, 1815. 

3. James, b. Sept. 21, 1S17; d. June 7, 1830. 

4. Amos Miles, b. Mch. 4, 1820. 

5. Levee Jennet, b. Apr. 8, 1S25; m. M. E. Terrell. 

6. Julia Henrietta, b. Apr. 27, 1828. 

7. James Benjamin, b. Nov. 10, 1831. 

Benjamin Farrel of Prospect m. Anna 
Broekett [d. of Zenas], Sept. 19, 183 1. 

George Farrel, s. of Zebah, ni. Nancy 
Perkins, d. of Jesse of Bethany, Jan. 
22, 1837. 

1. Catharine Emma, b. Nov. 6, 1838. 

2. Georgiana, b. ( )ct. 18, 1840; d. Nov. 28, 1842. 

John Farrell m. Jane Conray, July 28, 

1S50. 
Zebah Farrel, s. of Benjamin, m. IMehit- 
able Benham, d. of Elihu, May 16, 179S. 

1. Lucreiia Smith, b. May 13, 1799; d. Sept., 1812. 

2. Almon, b. Oct. 12, 1800. 

3. Sally Benham, b. Nov. 12, 1802; m. S. Tyler 

4. P'anny, b. Sept. 17, 1804; m. William Cay. 

5. Esther, b. Aug. 25, 1806; m. Hubbard Smith. 

Mary Fay m. Alartin Marshall, 1S42. 
Thomas Feeney ni. Catharine O'Brien, 

June 17, 1S4S. 
Aaron Fenn:^ 

Lyman, b. Aug. 26, 1770. 
Sally, b. Dec. g, 1771. 
Aaron, b. Dec. 20, 1773. 
Erastus, b. Dec. 29, 1781. 
Polly, b. Aug. 13, '1785. 
David, b. Nov. 12, 1787. 

Abijah Fenn, s. of Isaac of Watertown, 
m. Nancy Rexford, d. of Rev. Elisha of 
Huntington, May 19, 1793. 

1. Elisha Rexford, b. Feb. 24, 17Q4. 

2. Lydia Maria, b. l\Ich. 25, 1706! 

Adelia Fenn m. Asahel Watrous, 1839. 
Amos Fenn [s. of John] m. Eunice Doo- 
little, Nov. 18, 1766. 

I. Frederick Doolittle, b. Dec. 23, 1767; d. 1769. 

Eber [s. of Thomas] and Lydia Fenn:^ 

Lydia, b. May 15, 1786. 

Gamaliel Fenn [s. of John of Milford] m. 
Ruth Porter, d. of Tim., Oct. 12, 1774. 

1. Gamaliel, b. Feb. 16, 1775. 

2. Lvdia, b. Apr. 27, 1777. 

3. Sarah, b. Mch. 26, 1782. 

4. John, b. Apr. 15, 1788. 

5. Ruth, b. Jan. 10, 1792. 



50 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERS U BY. 



Fenn. Fenn. 

Harris Fenn m. Jane Abbott [d. of 
David], Oct. 6, 1S39. 

[H. Vienna, b. Feb, 6, 1844.] 

Isaac Fenn, s. of Thomas, dec'd, m. 
Mehitable Humaston, d. of Caleb, May 
7, 1770. [He d. Mch. iS; and she, Nov. 
23, 1S25.] 

I. Linus, b. Aug. 30, 1770. 
[2. Abijah, b. June 20, 1772; d. Jan. i, 1836.] 

3. Mehitable, b. Jan. 31, 1776. 

4. Sabra, b. Apr. 2, 1779. 

5. Rdsetta (Martha?), b. Dec. 6, 17S1. 

6. Bedi-, b. Jan. 10, 1786. 

Jason Fenn [s. of Thomas] m. Martha 
Potter, Jan. 15, 177S. 

I. Martha, b. Nov. 10, 1778. 

Jesse Fenn m. Chloe Thompson, July 5, 
1781.S 

1. Billy, b. Dec. 29, 1781. 

Chloe d. June 21, 17S2, and Jesse m. 
Phebe Blakeslee, Dec. 8, 1782. 

2. Horace, b. Oct. 15, 1783. 

3. Lyman, b. Nov. 20, 1785. 

[John Fenn from Wallingford, 1753: 

]\Liry, b. 1730. John, b. 1732. 

Lms, b. 1735; ni. Rzekiel Scott, and Amos .Scott. 

Samuel, b. 1739. Amos, b. 1745.] 

John Fenn, s. of John, m. Hepzibah Will- 
iams, d. of James, Jan. 26, 1757. 

1. John, b. Oct. 26, 1757. 

2. Olive, b. Mch. 27, 1760; ni. Ezekiel Scott. 

3. Mary, b. Dec. 4, 1762. 

John Fenn m. Eunice Scott, d. of Amos, 

May 24, 1780.' 
Lois Fenn m. Elon Clark, 1813. 
Nathan Fenn of New Haven m. Caroline 

Lane [wid. of Edwin], Dec. 29, 1844. 

vShe d. July 3, 1846, a. 24.- 
■^ Samuel Fenn m. Sarah Scott, June 24, 

1762.'* 

1. Sarah, b. Apr. 19, 1764. 

2. Diadama, b. Sept. 3, 1768. 

Samuel Fenn, Jr., m. Irene Sanford, 
Nov. 2, 1767. 

1. Irenia, b. May 13, 1768. 

2. Samuel, b. June 12, 1770. 

3. Eli, b. Aug. 28, 1772. 

4. Thankful, b. Apr. 8, 1776. 

5. Anna, b. Nov. 16, 1778. 

Samuel Fenn, s. of John, m. Rachel Os- 
born, d. of Daniel, Sept. 8, 1768. 

1. Abigail, b. Aug. 16, 1769. 

2. Loami, b. Sept. 5, 1773. 

3. Esther, b. Sept. 21, 1775. 

4. Samuel, b. Jan. 4, 1779. 

5. Asa, b. Aug. 29, 1783. 

6. Rachel, b. Oct. 24, 1786. 

Samuel Fenn, b. May 23, 1S13, s. of Asa 
of Middlebury, m. Maria Cowel, d. of 
Samuel, June' 17, 1S34, who d. Aug. 11, 

1S47. 

1. Ellen Maria, b. Aug. 21, 1835. 

2. George Dwight, b. Dec. 6, 1841. 

3. ^^ , b. Mch. 2, 1847. 



Fenn. Finch. 

Thomas Fenn [s. of Edward and Abigail 
Williams] and Christian: 
5. Sarah, b. Aug. 20, 1753; m. Jesse Sanford ? 

Christian d. May i, 1768; Thomas, Apr. 

25, 1769, [a. 62, leaving 

Lydia; m. Benajah Peck. 
Hannah; m. John Merriam. 
Thomas. Samuel. 
Esther; m. Elijah Warner. 
Sarah. Molly. Joseph. Lsaac. 
Jasiin. Jacofj, and Eber.] 

Thomas Fenn, s. of Thomas m. Aby 
Welton, d. of Richard, Apr. 19, 1760. 

1. Titus, b. Apr. 27, 1761. 

2. Thomas, b. Sept. 13, 1762. 

3. Abi, b. Nov. 4, 1764. 

4. Samuel, b. Mch. 2, 1767. 

5. Stephen, b. Apr. 16, 1769. 

6. Richard, b. Nov. 10, 1772. 

8. Silva, b. July 8, 1775. 

9. Jacob, b. Oct. I, 1777. 

Titus Fenn m. Rhoda Andrews, Mch. 16, 
1779.3 

1. Titus, b. June 27, 1780. 

2. Lucy, b. Nov. 23, 1781. 

3. Rhoda, b. July 7, 1783. 

4. Constant, b. Apr. 27, 1785. 

Vienna Fenn m. William Brown, 1844. 
Anna Fenton m. Richard Welton, 1724. 

John C. Fenton of Ashtabula, O., ra. 

Amelia Beecher of Prospect, June 22 

1S51. 
Mary Fenton m. Gershom Scott, 1728. 

[Dr. Edward Field of Enfield, b. July i, 
1777, m. Sally Baldwin, d. of Dr. Isaac, 
Apr. 30, 1S07. 

1. Junius L., b. Feb. i, 180S. 

Sally d. Aug. 8, 1S08, and Edward m. 
Esther Baldwin, d. of Dr. Isaac, Jan., 
1810. He d. Nov. 17, 1840; she, May 
15. 1843. 

2. Henry Baldwin, b. Jan. 11, iSii. 

3. Sarah Arietta, b. Aug. 17, 1813; d. Sept. 9, 1815. 

4. Mary Margaret, b. Mch. 12, 1817; m. C. B. Mer- 

riman. 

5. Charlotte Arietta, b. Dec. 6, 1S19; m. S. G. 

Blackman.] 

6. Edward Gustavus, b. Dec. 7, 1S22. 

Abigail Finch m. Daniel Hall. 
Hannah Finch m. J. B. Candee, 1795. 
Harriet Finch m. Gilbert Thomas, 1S32. 

James W. Finch, s. of Ashael, m. Polly 
Lowry, d. of Richard of Southington, 
Apr. 3, 1832. 

1. Cornelia E., b. Feb. 14, 1835. 

2. Alice M.. b. Feb. 26, 1837. 

3. Caroline J., b. Oct. 17, 1841. 

Joel Finch m. Sally Sanford of Prospect. 

Sept. 18, 182S. 
Julia Finch m. Horace P. Welton, 1S23. 
Lydia Finch m. Eli Osborn, 1793. 
Maria Finch m. Seth Higby, 1838. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP51 



Fixcir. Foot. 

Mary A. Finch m. Willis Johnson, 1837. 
Timothy Finch m. Bridget Doolan, June 

17, 1S4S. 

Samuel C. Fisk, b. in Heath, Mass., Dec. 

1, 1814, m. Feb. 5, 1S39, Abigail B. 
Wait, b. in West Boylston, Mass., Mch. 

2, 1 ,820. 

1. Jane A., b. in Oxford, Mass., Jan. 5, 1S40. 

2. Charlotte A., b. in Worcester, Dec. 26, 1842. 

3. Andrew Fayette, b. Dec. 9, 1846. 

Cynthia Fitch m. John Adams, 1794. 
James Fitzpatrick m. Ann Rennan, Sept. 

18, 1S51.S 

John Fitzpatrick m. Mary Inglesby, Sept. 

21, iSsi.** 
Owen Flanigan m. Catharine Coughlan, 

Mch. 3, 1S51. 
Annis Flinn m. Antipas Woodward, 1788. 
Timothy Flinn m. Catharine McAlister, 

May 25, 1S51. 
Lewis B. Follett m. Ann P. Steele, [d. of 

Norman of Derby], Sept. iS, 1836. 
Abigail Foot m. Joel Roberts, 1766. 
Active Foot m. Israel Frisbie, 1783. 
Amos and Abigail Footr 

Sally, b. Aug. 30, 1775. 
Hiel, b. July 30, 1777. 
Jesse, b. Nov. 26, 1780. 
Martha, b. Nov. 28, 1784. 
Ebenezer, b. Aug. 25, 1786. 

David Foot [b. Nov. 11, 1730], s. of Mo- 
ses, now of Waterbury, m. Hannah 
Brounson, d. of John, Feb. 28, 1752 
[and was killed in the attack upon Fair- 
field, 1779. She d. 1795]- 

1. Tryohena, b. Feb. 13, 1754. 

2. Rutii, b. Oct. S, 1756; [m. Aner Woodin] . 

3. A dau., b. Apr. 15; d. May 13, 1760. 

4. Mary, b. Sept. 4, 1761. 

5. Hannah, b. Dec. 16, 1763. 

6. Mary, b. Sept. 3, 1762. (?) 

7. Hannah, b. Dec. 16, 1764. (?) 

8. Comfort, b. June 23, 1769. 

9. Rebeckah, b. Nov. 3, 1773. 

David Foot, s. of Samuel, m. Mary Sco- 
vill, d. of Ezekiel, Apr. 11, 1776. 

1. Abraham, b. May 8, 1778. 

2. David, b. Jan. 20, 1780. 

3. Olive, b. Feb. 23, 1782.8 

4. Mercy, b. Dec. 9, 1783. 

5. Russel, b. May 7, 1786. 

6. Elijah, b. May 10, 1788. 

Ebenezer Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Mar- 
tha ]M()ss, d. of John of Wallingford, 
June 17, 1752, and d. Dec. 23, 1763. 
[Martham. John Hart, and John Thomp- 
son, and d. in Goshen, 1804, a. 71. 

1. Martha, b. Aug. 25, 1753. 

2. Hannah, b. Feb. 26, 1756. 

3. Olive, b. Mch. 6, 1758; d. July 31, 1759. 

4. Olive, b. July 12, 1760; d. Apr. 24, 1762. 

5. Olive, b. July 24, 1762. 



Foot. Foot. 

Ebenezer Foot, s. of Moses, m. Rebecca 

Barker, d. of Uzal, July i, I76i,and d. 

at Horseneck, June i, 1778; Rebecca m. 

Ezekiel vSanford. 

Elizabeth Foot m. Noah Griggs, 1765. 

Esther Foot m. Isaac Edwards, 1788.^ 

Isaac Foot, s. of Dr. Thomas, m. Sarah 
Selkrigg, [d. of William,] Aug. 21, 1770. 

1. Allin, b. Jan. 22, 1771. 

2. Anna, b. July 30, 1772. 

3. Isaac, b. Jan. 16, 1774. 

4. Sarah, b. June 20, 1779. 
[5. Titus, b. Aug. 25, 1781.] 

Jacob Foot, s. of Dr. Thomas, m. Esther 
Doolittle, Dec. 25, 1766. 

1. Abiah, (dau.) b. Aug. 31, 1767; d. Jan. 13, 1774. - 

2. Reuben, b. July 16; d. Nov. 14, 1769. 

3. Reuben, b. Dec. 4, 1770. 

4. Lucy, b. Sept. 17, 1772. 

5. Miles, b. Sept. 13, 1774. 

6. Jacob, b. June 14; d. June 22, 1776. 

7. Abi, b. Aug. 22, 1777; d. Jan. 1797. 

8. Eunice, b. May 3, 1779. 

9. Betsey, b. Mch. 9, 1782.8 

10. Sylvia, b. June 18, 1783. 

11. Jacob, b. Apr. 21, 1789. 

Esther d. Aug. 30, 1790; and Jacob m. 
Rhoda Saxton, wid. of Jehiel, May 26, 
1791. 

Joel B. Foot of New Haven m. Sarah 
Scovill, May 22, 1826. 

John Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Esther Mat- 
toon [d. of David], July 25, 1764. 

1. Ebenezer, b. Apr. 16, 1765; d. Feb. 16, 1768. 

2. John, b. Dec. 17, 1766; d. Aug. 13, 1772. 

Esther d. Mch. 10, 1769, and John m. 
Mary Peck, July 20, 1769. 

3. Esther Matoon, b. July 30, 1770. 

4. Ruth, b. Aug. 29, 1771. 

5. Ebenezer, b. July 6, 1773. 

6. John, b. Apr. 25, 1775 [d. unmarried, 1S06]. 

7. Mary, b. Jan. 24, 1778. 

S. Sabrea, b. June 29, 1779 [d. 1780]. 

Jonathan Foot m. Lydia [Sutliff, d. of 
John, June 14, 1727. He d. June 26, 
1754; she, Sept. 27, 1768. 

1. Jerusha, b. in Branford, Oct. i, 1728; d. 1741. 

2. Eunice, b. in Branford, July 26, 1731]; m. Timo- 

thy Williams. 

3. Aaron, b. Dec. 8, 1734. 
[4. Lydia, d. Dec. i, 1748.] 

Joseph Foot m. Thankful Ives [d. of Ste- 
phen of Wal.], Nov. 6, 1768. [He d. 
June 29, 17S9; she, Feb. 3, 1792, a. 48.] 

1. Mary, b. Aug. 12, 1769; d. Sept. 7, 1771. 

2. Joseph, b. Sept. 4, 1772. 

3. Stephen, b. Jan. 24, 1774. 

Lorinda Foot m. Benjamin Bates, 1776. 

Mary Foot m. Isaac Morgan, 1786. 

Moses Foot, b. Jan. 13, 1701-2 [m. Mary 
Byington, d. of John of Branford, June 
22, 1726. She d. Jan., 1740, a. 30], and 
Moses m. Ruth Butler, Nov. 5, 1740. 



52 -M- 



BISTORT OF WATEBBURY. 



Foot. Foot. 

He d. Feb., 1770; she, Aug. 7, 1792, 
a. 85. 

[His heirs were David, Moses, Aaron— who m. 
Mary Broiison, d. of John, Nov. 13, 1760— Eb- 
enezer, Obed, Rebecca, and Lvdia Curtis]. 
Mary had d. Feb. 21, 1758. 

[Moses Foot, Jr., b. 1735, m. Thankful 
Bronson, d. of John, Jr., Aug. 12, 1756. 
She d. Sept. 5, 1757, and Moses m. Amy 
Richards, d. of Jonas of East Hartford, 
May 17, 1759. 

I. llronson, b. Sept. 5, 1757.] 

Nathan Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Merriam 
Selkrigg, d. of WiUiam, dec'd, June 12, 
1759- 

1. Daniel, b. Apr. 3, 1760. 

2. Nathan, b. Nov. 16, 1761. 

3. Millecent, b. Nov. 6, 1763. 

4. Abijah, b. Mch. 23, 1766. 

5. Uri, b. July 12, 1768. 

6. Jesse, b. Sept. 17, 1770. 

Obed Foot [b. Nov. 25, 1741], s. of Moses, 
m. "]\Iary Todd, d. of Samuel, Dee. 3, 
1761. 

I. A dau., .-\senah, b. Sept. lo, 1762. 

Samuel Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Mary Ly- 
on, d. of John of Hadam, June 5, 1750, 
and d. June 9, 1776. 

1. .Mary, b. Jan. 10, 1750-1: d. Apr. 9, 1768. 

2. David, b. Jan. 24, 1753. 

3. Elizabeth, b. July i, 1755. 

4. Anne, b. Oct. 16, 1757. 

5. Samuel, b. May 2, 1760. 

6. Huldah, b. Feb. 13, 1762. 

7. Luce, b. Oct. 8, 1764; d. May 7, 1767. 

Dr. Thomas Foot and Elizabeth [Sutliff. 
He d. Dec. 19, 1776, a. 77. 

Samuel, b. 1723. Jemima, b. 172^; m. Abraham 

Hicko.K. 
Elizabeth, b. 1728. Ebenezer, b. 1730. 
Timothy, b. 1735 1. 

Children b. in Waterbury: 

S. Nathan, b. Jan. 25, 1737-8. 
9. Thomas, b. .May 10, 1740. 

10. John, b. Aug. 21, 1742. 

11. Jacob, b. Oct. 30, 1744. 

12. Joseph, b. Apr. 3, 1747. 
I ;. Isaac, b. Mch. 25, 1750. 

Thomas Foot, Jr., s. of Thomas, m. Re- 
becka Dowd, d. of Mr. [Jo^nJ Dowd of 
Middleton, May 17, i7<'>2. 

1. Amos, b. Jan. 15, 1763. 

2. Rachel, b. June 18, 1704. 

Timothy Foot, s. of Thomas, m. Sarah 
Garnsey, d. of Jonathan, June 5, 1755. 

1. Sarah, b. Mch. 29, 1756. 

2. Timothy, b. Nov. 4, 1757; d. June 15, 1762. 

3. Jemima, b. Nov. 9, 1759; m. R. T. Reynolds. 

4. Levy (a son), b. Oct. 5, 1761. 

5. Abigail, b. Oct. 15, 1704. 

6. Timothy, b. Apr. 5, 1768. 

7. Jonathan Northrop, b. May 17, 1774; d. 1776. 

Sarah, d. Oct. 22, 1777, and Timothy m. 
Lucy [Parks], wid. of Preserved Wheeler 
of Woodbury, Mch. 11, 177S. [He d. 
May 8, i799;'she, Mch. 9, 1S15. 

I. Lucy Roxanna, b. Apr. 29, 1779]. 



Forbes. Forrest. 

Clarissa A. Forbes m. Ruel Potter, 1S25. 

Abel Ford m. Susanna Painter, Sept. 25, 
1771. 

1. Huldah, b. Dec. 16, 1772. 

2. Joel, b. Nov. II, 1774. 

Amos Ford, a stranger, d. Dec. 6, 1S37, 

a. 71.- 
Barnabas and Mary Ford: 

6. Zilla, b. July 12, 1734; m. Thomas Way. 

7. Abel, b. Jan. 29, 1737-8. 

Barnabas d. Mch. 10, 1746 7. 
[Prob. rec. add Ebenezer, Cephas, Enos, 
Sarah, who m. Abel Sutliff, and Mary, 
who m. Reuben Blakeslee.] 

Cephas Ford, s. of Barnabas, m. Sarah 
How, d. of John, May iS, 1752, and d. 
Nov. 4, 175S. Sarah m. A. Luddington. 

1. Mary, b. Nov. 19, 1752. 

2. Daniel, b. Nov. 16, 1754. 
i. Cephas, b. Sept. 21, 1758. 

Daniel Ford [s. ■ of Cephas?] m. Phebe 
Camp, Mch. 6, 1780. ■■ 

1. Nancy, b. Feb. 9, 1781. 

2. Aaron, b. June 24, 1782. 

3. Betsey, b. June 17, 1784. 

4. Isaac, b. June 18, 1786. 

5. Phebe, b. Mch. 2, 1789. 

Ebenezer Ford, s. of Barnabas, m. Mar- 
tha How, d. of John, .July S, 1752. 

1. Barnabas, b. May 7, 1753; d. Oct. 2, 1754. 

2. Amos, b. June 24, 1754. 

3. Anise, b. Oct. 12, 1756. 

4. Barnabas, b. Jan. 29, 1759. 

5. Eunice, b. Sept. 27, 1760. 
... Mary, b. Feb. 22, 1768. ^ 

Elias Ford, Esq., s. of Nath'l of Cheshire, 
m. Eunice Cook, d. of Samuel of Wal., 
Oct. 14, 1798, and d. Sept. 9, 1S36. 

1. Jared K., b. May 23, 1800. 

2. William Y., b. Aug. 27, 1802. 
4. Samuel C, b. Mch. 15, 1806. 

n. Harriet C, b. Feb. 12, 1816; m. Samuel Hopkins. 
The third and hfth d. in infancy. 

Enos Ford was m. to Rebecca Jenkins of 
Litchfield by Judah Champion, Nov. 
5> 1772. 

1. Keziah, b. ."Vug. 4, 1773. 

2. Lucy, b. July 30, 1775. 

Miles B. Ford of Prospect m. Betsey 

Closes, July 19, 1840. 
Zerah Ford, s. of Thaddeus of Cornwall, 

m. Semantha Payne, d. of Thomas, 

Apr. 5, iSoi. 

1. Elevia, b. Jan. 14, 1802. 

2. Chauncey, b. Jan. 8, 1804. 

George Forgue of Newtown m. Emily A. 

vScovill of Naugatuck, May 23, 1S41. 
Alfred Forrest m. Melissa Wright— l)oth 

from England — Jan. 15, 1S46. 

I. A son, b. July 7, 1847. 

Jane E. Forrest m. Miles Morris, 1847. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP53 



Forrest. Francis. 

John M. Forrest, s. of Samuel, b. Oct. 

23, 1S05, in Birmingham, Eng. , m. 

Tamer Allen, d. of Isaac, Mcli. 6, 1829. 

1. Rebecca S., b. Nov. 12, 1829; m. G. Bruise. 

2. Mary Jane, b. Mch. ig, 1831. 

3. Harriet M., b. Aug. 27, 1832. 

4. Samuel A., b. Sept. 8, 1838. 

5. Annetta L., b. Nov. 26, 1841. 

6. John Earnest, b. Feb. 6, 1844. 

7. Bellmont G., b. June i, 1846. 

Phebe Forrest m. William Stanley, 1850. 

Sarah Forrest m. Reuben Brown, 1S2S. 

Susan Forrest m. Thomas Warner, 1S4S. 

Fortune, servant of Dr. Preserved Por- 
ter, and entered by Dr. Porter. Record 
of Fortune, a Negroe's children: 

Jacob, b. May 27, 17S6. 
Mira, b. Dec. 29, 178S. 
Koxa, b. Apr. 30, 1792. 

(Added in a different hand:) 
Africa, li. Sept. 16, 1772. 

George Foster d. Jan. 25, 184S, a. 33.- 

Rev. Abraham Fowler m. Sarah Case of 
Simsbury, May 14, 17S1. 
I. Abraham C, b. May 29, 1785. 

Sarah d. Jan. 26, 1795, and Abraham 
m. Rebeckah Judson [d. of Daniel and 
Sarah] of Stratford, Sept. 7, 1795. [He 
d. Nov., 181 5, a. 70.] 

Abraham Fowler, s. of Rev. Abraham 
[m. Fanny Porter, d. of Nathan, and d. 
at sea, Apr. 30, 1834]. 

Sarah Rebecca, Henry Porter, Stern Humphrey, 
Fannv Prudentia, and |ulia Ann, bap. Mcli. 

5, 1818. 

Ambrose Baldwin Fowler, s. of Thad- 

(leus, m. Lowla Soplironia Fowler, d. 
of Maltby — all of Guilford— Apr. 11, 

1S28. 

1. Lowla Todd, b. Feb. 28, 1829. 

2. Lois, b. Nov. 23, 1832; m. C.'j. Tyler. 

3. ApoIIos, b. Nov. 15, 1842— all b. in Northford. 

Miner Fowler m. [Mrs.] Charity Linsley 
[d. of Giles Ives], Aug. 6, 1S27. 

Dr. Remus Fowler m. ]\Iary Miller, June 
II, 1S27. 

William M. Fowler of Northford m. 
Bethia Hopson of Wells, Vt., Feb. 6, 
1842. 

Augustus Fox m. Hannah Warner — both 
of Naugatuck — Nov. 24, 1S39. 

Richard Fox of New Haven m. Elizabeth 

Wilson, Apr. 9, 1842. 
Anner Francis m. Stephen Culver, 1793- 

Mary Francis, d. of Nancy, b. Apr. 19, 
1S14. 

Mary Francis m. Edward Sandland. 



Freeman. Frisbie. 

Caleb Freeman, b. Mch. 20, 1816, m. in 

l^ng. [May 7], 1S35, Jane Gardner, b. 

Oct. 10, 1S16. 

1. Mary Jane, b. in Wolcottville, Feb. 25, 1838. 

2. Julia Emma, b. in Bristol, May 10, 183Q. 

3. Martha Maria, b. Sept. 23, 1843. 

4. Sarah H., b. Sept. 2, 1845. 

5. Esther Elizabeth, b. Jan. S, 1847. 

Henry Freeman of Watertown m. Au- 
gusta Jackson of Woodbury, Oct. 9, 
1S50 (col.). 

Polland Freeman of Watertown m. Esther 
Sicphe7'cns, Apr. 17, 1S25 (col.). 

Richard Freeman of Wat. m. Hannah 
Souare of Oxford, Jan. 9, 1792.^ (Dick?) 

Sarah Freeman m. Deac. Th. Judd, 1687. 

Andrew B. French m. Mary J. Richards 
of Woodbury, Sept. 21, 1851. 

Henrietta French m. Luman Hall, 1S50. 

Electa Frery m. John Singleton, 1S50. 

Abigail Frisbie m. Dan Tuttle, 1769. 

Almira Frisbie m. David vSomers, 1S30. 

Anna Frisbie m. Isaac Scott, 1753. 

Catharine (Conkling), relict of Culpepper 
Frisbie, m. Jesse Leavenworth, 1761. 

Charles Frisbie was m. to Lydia Alcox 
by Alexander Gillett, Jan. 4, 17S1. 

Daniel Frisbie, s. of Reuben, m. Eunice 
Hall, d. of Jared, Sept. 29, 1794, and d. 
Nov. 15, 1850, a. So.''' 

1. Julia, b. Nov. 2, 1795; ni. B. T. Hitclicock. 

2. Alma, b. Sept. 7, 1798; m. Artemus Hoadley. 

3. Lorrain (Lauren), Aug. 2, 1800. 

4. Lucius D., b. June 15, 1804. 

5. Caroline E., b. May i, 1809; m. Edward Scott. 

6. [Mary] Chloe, b. Oct. i, 1811. 

[All these died in the order of their birth, be- 
tween tlie ayes of 80 and 84.] 

Ebenezer Frisbie, s. of Reuben, m. De- 
borah Twitchel, d. of Isaac, dec'd, Nov. 
23, 1791, and d. in New Haven, O., 
May 14, 1S35. 

1. Hannah, b. July 2, 1792; m. Horace Porter, Jr. 

2. Clarry, b. Aug. 21, 1794; m. Timothy Porter. 

3. Richard, b. June 26, 1796. 

4. Ame, b. July 21, 1798. 

5. Eben Wakelee, b. Apr. 7, 1800. 

6. Polly, b. Apr. 29, 1802. 

7. Reuben, b. July 3, 1810. 

8. Emeline, b. Mch. 7, 1812; d. in Ohio, ()ct. 27, 

1833, slie having been m. to John Slcinner, left 
one dau., Emily, b. June 7, 1S31. 

Edward L. Frisbie m. Hannah A. Wel- 
ton [d. of Hershell], Feb. 11, 1S50. 

Elijah Frisbie and Abigail [Culver]. She 
d. Apr. 19, 1771; he, Feb. 15, iSoo, a. Si. 

John, b. Apr. 8, 1762. 

Hannah Frisbie m. Elnathan Thrasher, 

177S. 

Israel Frisbie of Branford m. Active 
Foot, d. of Capt. Abr. , Sept. 22, 17S3. 



54 Ai- 



HI8T0RY OF WATERS URT. 



FRisiiY. Frost. 

Lauren Frisby m. Artimctia Wclton [d. 
of Richard], 1S21. 

1. Sarah Mariend, b. Sept. 22, 1822. 

2. Edward Laurens, b. Aiii?. 22, 1824. 
s. Felicia Ann, b. July 31, 1827. 

Lucius Daniel Frisbie m. Nancy Warner, 
Apr. 17, I S3 1. 

Reuben Frisbie, s. of Elijah, m. Hannah 
Waklee, d. of Ebenezer, May 25, 1769. 

1. Elizabeth, b. Auk. 20, 1769; m. Mark Warner. 

2. Daniel, b. Jan. 16, 1771. 

3. Ebenezer, b. Nov. 30, 1773. 

4. Abigail, b. Dec. 9, 1775. 

Hannah d. Nov. 22, 177S, and Reuben 
m. Ruth Seward, d. of Amos, June 3, 
1779. He d. Sept. 10, 1S24, a. 78. 

Samuel, Polly, and Sally, bap. Aug. lo, 1798.2 

Ruth Frisbie m. Riley Alcott, iSio. 

Samira Frisbie m. Joel Johnson, 1S27. 

Samuel Frisbie, Esq., s. of Reuben, m. 
Mrs. Isabella Barnes, Feb. 3, 1S13. 

Sarah Frisbie m. Ichabod Merrills, 17S0. 

Sarah Frisbie m. George Faber, 1S51. 

Alpheus Frost, s. of Jesse, m.' Jerusha 
Williams, d. of Timothy, June 19, 1816. 

1. Mark Augustus, b. Apr. 16, 1818. 

2. Lydia Maria, b. Feb. i, 1820; m. H. Williams. 

3. Melissa, b. Jan. 6, 1822; m. T. H. Patten. 

4. Electa Ann, b. Feb. 28, 1824. 

5. Charles, b. June 16, 1826. 

6. George, b. June 10, 1829. 

7. Styles, b. Nov. 7, 1831. 

[Alpheus d. in 1S34 and] Jerusha m. 
Martin Cook of Southington, 1S38. 

Charles Frost [s. of Alpheus] m. Mary 
U. Sperry [d. of LuUier], July 13, 1S51. 

David Frost, s. of Samuel, m. Mary 
Beach, d. of Joseph, Nov. 5, 1761. He 
d. Dec. 15, 1S12; she, Feb. 6, iSig. 

1. Jesse, b. Oct. 18, 1762. 

2. Enoch, b. Jan. 8, 1765. 

Enoch Frost, s. of David, m. Anna Cul- 
ver, d. of Stephen, Sept. 26, 1792, and 
d. ]May 27, 1S22. 

1. Anna, b. July i; d. July 2, 1793. 

2. Stephen Culver, b. July 18, 1795. 

3. Selah, b. Feb. 2, 1798. 

4.' Nancy, b. Mch. 31, 1801; m. 'J'. J. Payne. 

5. Enoch William, b. May 7, 1803. 

6. Eunice, b. Apr. 2, iSii; m. J. J. Doolittlc. 

Enoch W. Frost, s. of Enoch, m. June 
24, 1823, Lydia Hall, b. June 21, 1804, 
d. of Heman of Wolcott. 

1. Angcline L., b. July 26, 1824; m. E. T. Bill. 

2. Eliza Ann, b. Mch. 23, 1827; d. Jan., iS^i. 

3. Franklin Hall. b. Nov. 24, 1828. 

4. William Dana, b. Feb. 23, 1831. 

5. Ann, b. May 5; d. May 20, 1833. 

6. Henry, b. Mch. 5, 1836. 

7. Jane Elizabeth, b. Jan. 30, 1842. 

George J. Frost, b. Aug. 17, 1S13, s. of 
Daniel, m. 1833, Martha B. Merriam, b. 



Frost. ^^^^^ 

Nov. 6, 1S16, d. of Chester of Water- 
town. 

1. Charles A., b. May 24, 1834. 

2. William A., b. Aug. 25, 1836. 

3. Fanny J., b. Nov. 12, 1838. 

4. Martha J., b. June 28, 1841. 

5. Sarah L., b. Veh. 21, 1844; d. May, 1846. 

Horace Frost [s. of WillardJ from North 
Haven m. Elvira Hoadlev, d. of Arte- 
mus, Oct. 7, 1S35. 

1. Eveline, b. July 31, 1837. 

2. Lucy, b. Sept. 11, 1843. 

Jared Frost, s. of Willard of North 
Haven, m. Susan Eliza Lambert, d. of 
Jesse, formerly of Wat., May 15, 1842. 

I. Charles N., b. July 15, 1843. 

Jason Frost, s. of Samuel, Jr., m. Lvdia 

Prichard, d. of Isaac, Feb. 5, 1784.' 

1. Polly, b. June 24, 1785. 

2. Ancel, b. Feb. 28, 1790. 

Jesse Frost, s. of David of Southington, 
m. Abigail Culver, d. of Lieut. Stephen, 
Nov. 13, 1783, and d. Oct. 12, 1827. 

1. James, b. Mch. 21, 1784. 

2. Esther, b. Aug. 29, 1786; m. John Smith. 

3. Leva, b. Apr. 14, 1789; m. Benjamin Farrell 

4. Alpheus, b. Oct. 3, 1791. 

5. Jesse Beecher, b. Mch. 3, 1794. 

6. Electa, b. Nov. 16, 1796; d. Oct. 16, 1803 

7. Van Julius, b. Mch. 3, 1798. 

8. Sylvester, b. Nov. 19, 1801; d. Sept., 1803 

9. Electa, b. Jan. 9, iSos; m. Edniond Tompkins 
10. Abi,i;ail, b. Mch. 9, iSoS; m. John Mitchell. 

Mary Frost m. Ezekiel Smith, 1806. 
Moses Frost, s. of Samuel, m. Phebe 
Prindle, d. of Jon. of Wal., Jan. 29, 

1755- 

1. Jams, b. Jan. 31, 1757; d. Sept. 20, 175S. 

2. Anne, b. Aug. 12, 1759. 

Moses m. Els Selkrigg, d. of William, 
Aug. 13, 1762. [He d. Mch. 10, 1814'; 
she, Jan. 11, 1826, a. 81.] 

1. Phebe, b. Sept. 13, 1763. 

2. Bela Fenn, b. Dec. 10, 1765. 

3. Naomi, b. Sept. 18, 1767. 

Polly Frost m. M. B. Smith, 1S46. 
Rebecca Frost m. Jonathan Scott, 1729. 
-Samuel Frost and Naomi [Fenn, d. of 
Edward of Wal., m. Mch. 21, 1733. 

--T. Moses, b. Jan. 6, 1734, in Wallingford. 

2. Naomi, b. Mch. 31, 1735, in Wallingford], m. 

Elam Brown. 

3. Samuel, b. Feb. 15, 1736-7. 

4. Patience, b. Dec. 31, 1738; m. John Hopkins. 
,5. Joel, b. Sept. 15, 1741. 

' 6. David, b. Sept. t6, 1743. 

7. Timothy, b. July 19, 1744. 

8. Submit, b. Mch. 24, 1745-6; m. W. Andrews. 

Naomi, d. Apr. 7, 1746. and Samuel m. 
Hannah Welton, d. of George, Jan. 29, 
1751-2. She d. Jan. 27, 1753, and Sam- 
uel m. Bettee Newton, d. of Thomas 
of Milford, May i, 1755. [He d. Dec. 
21, 1803, a. 97]. 

9. Bette, b. Aug. 27, 1758, in. Theo. Taylor. 



FAMILY BECORDS. 



AP55 



Frost. Fulford. 

Samuel Frost, s. of Samuel, m. Sary 

Cooper, d. of Caleb of New Haven, 

Mch. 15, 1759. 

1. Isaac, b. Nov. 24, 1759. 

2. John, b. Oct. 19, 1761. 

3. Sarah, b, Dec. 2, 1763; m. Ainasa Bronson. 

4. Samuel, b. Oct. 15, 1766. 

5. Rachel, b. jNIch. 27, 1772. 

6. Olive, b. Jan. 16, 1776. 

7. EH, b. Feb. 7, 1780. 

8. David, b. Oct. 18, 1782. 

Samuel Frost the third: 

I. Elisha, b. Feb. 26, 1762. 

3. Lucy, the second b. in Wat., b. May 31, 1766. 

4. Samuel, b. May 18, 1769. 

5. Ame, b. Aug. 2, 1777. 

Samuel Frost, Jr. m. Clyniena Porter, 
Apr. 24, 17S8. 

I. Silas, b. June m, 1789. 

Stephen C. Frost, s. of Enoch, and Sa- 
rah Barnes, b. Sept. iS, 1788, d. of Jo- 
siah of Wolcott, m. Mch., 1S17. She d. 
1845- ■ 

I. Lampson Josiah, b. Mch., 1S18. 

E. Sarah Ann, b. Nov. 10, 1819; m. A. G. Stocking. 

3. William Butler, b. Nov. 11,1821. 

4. Julia M., b. Jan. 3, 1824; m. W. H. Kirk. 

Timothy Frost, s. of Samuel, m. Abigail 
Benham, d. of Joseph of Wallingford, 
Mch. 17, 1764. 

1. Hannah Miles, b. Nov 17, 1704; d. July, 1S07. 

2. Anne Dale, b. F'eb. 23, 1767. 
Abigail, bap. June 18, 1769.- 
Lucinda, bap. July 28, 1771. 

William Butler Frost, s. of Stephen C, 
m. Amelia Daines of Litch., Oct. 5,1841. 

I. Frederic Mortimer, b. Apr. 17, 1846. 

Amelia d. Sept. 24, 1S46, and William 
m. Sarah Bacon of N. Y., Aug.-2S, 1S48. 
Gershom Fulford, s. of Abr. , m. Abigail 
Welton, d. of Stephen, dec'd Mch. 29, 
1727. [He d. 1791, a. 90; she, 1790]. 

I. Mary, b. Feb. 16, 1727-8; m. Joseph Bronson. 
The second lying in 3 children at a birth. All 

boys Dyed. 

5. Luke, b. Apr. i, 1730. 

6. James, b. Mch. 14, 1732; d. May 19, 1753. Dyed 

by being drowned at Derby Falls. 

7. Titus, b. Nov. 25, 1733. 

8. John, b. Oct. 30, 1735. 

9. Jonathan, b. Dec. 3, 1737. 

10. Dorcas, b. Oct. i, 1739; her child, Allen, b. 
Nov. 22, d. Nov. 24, 1763. 

II. Lois, b. Sept. 6, d. Sept. 10, 1741. 

12. LTnice, b. May ig, 1743. 

13. David, b. Jan. 19, 1747-8; d. Aug. 2_i, 1749. 

Jonathan Fulford, s. of Gershom, m. 
Thankful Doolittle, d. of Phinehas of 
Wallingford, Dec. 12, 1764. 

Lois, bap. Apr. 13, 1766. "■' 

Luke, b. May 9, 1767 (called ist child). 

Luke Fulford, s. of Gershom, m. Hannah 
Barnes, d. of Samuel, Dec. 20, 1752. 

A son, b. Sept. 23; d. Oct. 6, 1753. 

Luke, d. 1756, [leaving a dau., Sarah], 
and Hannah m. Daniel Barnes, 1758. 



Fulford. Gaylord. 

Titus Fulford, s. of Lieut. Gershom, m. 
Susanna Arnold, d. of Capt. Nathaniel, 
July 27, 1758; she d. July 5, 1798. 

1. Noah Arnold, b. ISIay 29, 1759. 

2. Abigail, b. Apr. 21, 1761. 

3. James, b. July 12, 1763. 

4. Liza, b. Oct. 17, 1765. 

5. Dinah, b. Feb. 18, 1768. 

6. Sarah, b. Mch. 20, 1770. 

7. Ruth, b. Aug. 6, 1772. 

8. Phebe, b. Dec. 16, 1774. 

9. Nathaniel Arnold, b. July 25, 1777. 
10. Lois, b. Oct. 3, 1783. 

William Fulford of Farmington m. Em- 
cline Prichard, June 16, 1S32. 

Cynthia Fuller m. Elisha Leavenworth, 

1845. 

Edward J. Fuller m. Lucy Essex of 

Cornwall, Jan. 9, 1S51. 
Jane Fuller m. David S. Smith, 1S46. 
Wildman Fuller of Kent m. Nancv 

Mitchell, May 5, i>^44. 
Bernard Gaffney m. I\Iary Colclough in 

L-eland [1843J. 

1. Ann, b. in N. H., Sept. 7, 1845. 

James Gaffney m. Mary Halligan in Le- 
land, 1840. 

T. John, 1). in Ireland, Dec. 8, 1842. 

2, I'.irnard, h. in Wolcotville, Apr. 2, 1845. 

Thomas Gaffney m. Ann Lally, July 6, 

185 1.8 
John Galvin, b. June, iSio, and Ann 
Woods, b. Aug., 1810 — both from Ire- 
land— m. in Plattsburgh, N. Y. , Feb. 
7,1835. 

1. John, b. May 2, 183.J, 

2. Catharine, b. July 12, 1S41. 

3. Mary Ann, b.Oc't. 30, 1843. 

4. Thomas, b. Feb. 11, 1846. 

John Galvin m. Ellen Leary, ]\Ich. 3, 1S51. 
Mary Gambel m. James Porter, Jr., 1778. 
Jane Gardner m. Caleb Freeman, 1835. 
Garnsey see Guernsey. 
Charles Elam Gaylord m. Polly Rebecca 

Bradley— both of Ply.— Dec. 28, 1831. 
Diadama Gaylord m.W. S. Bronson, 1841. 
Eliza Gaylord m. A. Stevens and J. 

Lines. 
Elizabeth Gaylord [b. 1680], d. of Joseph, 

m. Joseph Hikcox, 1699. 
[John Gaylor of Waterbury m. Elizabeth 

Heicock of Woodbury, Nov. 20, 1701]. 

Joseph Gaylord, soon to Joseph, was niar- 
ryed to Mary Hikcox, d. to Joseph of 
Woodbury, dec'd, Feb. S, 1699- 1700. 

Apr. I. [Mary], b. Nov. 22, 1700 [bapt. in Woodbury, 
20, May 23, 1703] . 

170^. 2. A soon, b. and d. I'eb. 7, 1702-3. 

3. A dau. Thankful by name b. genary 25, 1705. 
[Thankful and E.xperience, dau's of Joseph 
Gaylord, bap. in Wood. July 4, 1704. (?)] 



56 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Gaylord. (tOLDSMITH. 

Livinia Gaylord m. Marvin Sperry, 1832. 
Lois Gaylord m. John B. Alcox, 17S5. 
Luther Gaylord m. Laura Judd, Aug. 3, 

1S33. 
Mary Gaylord m. Stephen Welton, 1701. 
Marah Gaylord, d. of Joseph of Durham, 

ni. John Hikcox, 1719. 
Miles Gaylord from Hamden, 1). June 22, 

1824, and Elizabeth Byington, b. Jan. 

28, 1S20, d. of Theo., m. Sept. i, 1845. 

I. Aurelia Gertrude, b. Au,v'. 7, 1S46. 

Millicent Gaylord m. John Southmayd, 

Jr., 1739, and Timothy Judd, 1749. 
Sarah Gaylord m. Thomas Judd, 1688. 
Michael Geoghan ra. Catharine Kilduff, 

May 4, 1S51. 
Jane Gerard m. F. L. Potter, 1850. 
Martin Gibbins m. Hannah Hennessy, 

Sept. 6, 1S51. 
David Gibbs, s. of Obed, m. Nancy Prich- 

ard, d. of Isaac, Jan. 28, 1S22. 

1. George Franklin, b. Nov. 9, 1822. 

2. Nancy Eliza, b. Oct. o, 1824. 

Obed Gibbs, s. of Eliakim of Litch., m. 
Hannah Scovil, d. of Tim., Mch. 17, 
1793- 

1. David, h. Aui;. 2(1, 1794. 

2. Ransom, b. Antj. 16, 1796. 

3. Sarah, b. Sept. 22, 1798; m. M. Clark. 

Statira Gibburd m. L. W. Elton, 1839. 

Abigail Gilbert m. Giles Ives, 1799. 

George Gilbert, s. of Samuel of New- 
Haven, m. Maria English, d. of Judson 
of Oxford, July 4, 1839. 

1. Cornelia Maria, b. June 14, 1841. 

2. Charles Judson, b. June 24, 1843. 

William B. Gilbert m. Marv Ann Root 

of Litchfield, Mch. 14, 1847'. 
Orange Gillet of Goshen m. Mary Ann 

Colby in Norfolk, Aug. 26, 1S34, and d. 

in Goshen, Aug. 18, 1841. 

1. Albert, b. in Goshen, Feb. 17, 1836. 

2. Alexander, b. in Canaan, July 19, 1838. 

3. Mary Mayretta, b. in Goshen, June 16, 1841. 

Dolly Gleason m. Rev. Ed. Porter, 1789. 
Sarah Glover m. Timothy Corcoran, 1831. 
Eliza Goddard m. J. W. Worden, 1851. 
Clement J. Godfrey from Walpole, N. 

H., m. ^lary J. Cooley from Amherst, 

Mass., May'13, 1834. 

I. William Henrv Kellogg, b. in Covcntrv, May 
14, 1839. 

Frederic Goldsmith from Plymouth, b. 
Jan. 22, 1S04, m. June 13, 1824, Ruth E. 
Brown, d. of Reuben, b. July 21, 1806. 

1. Ransom Hurlbut, b. Aug. 23, 1825. 

2. William, b. June 12, 1827. 

3. Daniel, b. May 15, 1829. 

4. Francis Edward, b. June 15, 1831. 



Goldsmith. Graves. 

5. Lyman, b. July 7, 1833. 

6. Ann Eliza, b. Aug. 27, 1836. 

7. Evehne, b. June 15, 1838. 

8. Mary Jane,'b. May 29, 1840. 

9. Harriet Maria, b. May 28, 1842. 

10. Nancy, b. July 15, 1844. 

11. Ellen, b. Apr. 1S47. 

Clarissa Goodrich m. A. Brockett, 1842. 

Amy Goodwin m. S. Stoddard, 1780. 

Betsey Goodwin m. Jesse Hopkins, 1794. 

James P. Goodwin m. Emilv Grillev, 
Oct. 23, 1S45. 

Henry W. Goodwin of Cabotville, Mass., 
m. Caroline A. Hinman [d. of Joel], 
:May (), 1 846. 

Sarah Goodwin m. William Adams, 1775. 

Charles Goodyear m. Clarissa Beecher, 
Aug. 25, 1824. 

Cynthia [Bateman, w. of Amasa] Good- 
year d. Oct. iSif).' 

Harriet Goodyear m. J. S. Tomlinson, 
1S30. 

Maria Goodyear m. St. Hotchkiss, 1S27. 

James and Sarah Gordan (Gordon): 

1. Sarah, b. Feb. 10, 1745-6; m. J. Lewis. 

2. Ame, b. in Wat.^ Mch. 5, 1747-8 [d. young]. 

3. Phebe, b. in AVat., Oct. 14, 1751; m. Obad. Win- 

ters. 

I James d. 1752] and Sarah m. William 

Rowley, 1753. 
Joseph Gould of Davton, O., m. Rachel 

Turner of Northfield, Nov. 20, 1842. 
Sarah Gould m. Dr. Pres. Porter, 1764. 
Alonzo Granniss, s. of Caleb, m. Esther 

Adelia Payne, d. of Silas, Oct. 3, 1837. 

1. ALirgaret Louisa, b. Oct. 6, 1840 [d. 1850. 

2. Frederick, b. Oct. iS, 1851.] 

Caleb Granniss of Cheshire m. Ruth 
Arnst, d. of John, Nov. 29, 1810. 

[Edward, b. 1813. 
Marshall, b. 1815. 
James, b. Aug. i, 1818. 
Alonzo, b. Mch. 27, 1820.] 

Caleb A. Granniss [s. of Simeon] m. 

Mary J. Bronson, Aug. 13, 184S. 
James M. Granniss, s. of Caleb, m. Irena 

A. Welton, d. of James of Watertown, 

Oct. 7, 183S. 

I. Henrietta, b. Jan. 2, 1845. 

Lydia Granniss m. Darius Scovill, i77i-^ 
Cornelius Graves, s. of Joseph, m. Han- 
nah (Brooks), wid. of John Clark, ]\lay 
I, 1751. 

1. Stephen, b. Feb. 2, 1752. 

2. Benjamin, b. Mch. 12, 1754. 

3. Cornelius, b. Mch. g, 1756. 

4. Jacob, b. Sept. i, 175S. 

Hannah d. Nov. 14, 1759- ^nd Cornelius 
m. Phebe Prindle, d. of Nathan, dcc'd, 
Aug. 13, 1761. 

5. Jacob, b. July 12, 1762. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP57 



Graves. Griggs. 

George Graves, s. of Elijah of Hebron, 

m. Esther Beardsley, d. of Levi, June 

6, 1807. 

I. Tallman, b. Mch. 30; d. Apr. 11, 1808. 

Hannah (or Heloise) Graves m. Adna 

Blakeslee, 1786.^ 
Joseph Graves— his wife, Sarah, d. ]\Ich. 

16, 1751. 
Joshua Graves, s. of Joseph, m. Rhoda 

Bronson, d. of Lieut. John, Apr. 5, 1750. 

1. Manerva, b. Nov. 26, 1750. 

2. Simmeon, b. Sept. 20, 1752. 

3. Jesse, b. Jan. 30, 1755. 

4. Asa, b. Feb. 19, 1757. 

5. Sarah, b. Mch. 5, 1759. 

6. Chansey, b. Sept. 9, 1761. 

Christopher Gray, s. of Jonathan, m. 
Harriet Phelps — both from Mass. — 
Mch. 31, 1842. 

1. Joseph C, b. Mch. 27, 1843. 

2. Harriet R., b. Sept. 26, 1844. 

Elizabeth Gray m. J. L. Darrow, 1S4S. 
James M. Gray from Salisbury, b. July 

7. 1820, and Henrietta Thomas, d. of 
Bradley P., b. July 18, 1826, ni. July 

8. 1843. 

1. Mary AdeUne, b. Apr. 7, 1845. 

2. FrankHn, b. Alay 10, 1847. 

William Green, b. Nov. 15, 1820, and 
Mary Ann Perkins, b. Feb. 5, 1821— 
both in England — were m. June, 1843. 

I. Ann Elizabeth, b. May 8, 1844. 

Sally Gregory m. Nath'l Hikcox, 1800. 
William B. Gregory of Ridgefield m. 

Jane E. Cummings, Mch. 28, 1848. 
Elizabeth Gridley m. Sol. Griggs, 177S.3 
Martha Gridley m. Nathan Seward, 1779. 
Rev. Urial Gridley m. Susanna Norton, 

May 23, 17S5.2 

I. Urial, b. May 15, 1786. 

Barsheba Griffen m. David Osborn, 1774. 

Eunice Griffin m. John Scott, 1730. 

Ruth Griffin m. John Osborn, 17S9. 

Isaac Griggs d. Jan. 27, 176S. [He left 
Jacob of Wallingford, Noah, Samuel, 
Solomon, Paul, iSarah, w. of William 
Munson, and Rachel Spencer.] 

Noah Griggs and Hannah: 

1. Isaac, b. Apr. ii, 1760. 

2. Mary, b. Apr. 8, 1762; d. Mch. 10, 1763. 

Hannah d. Jan. 23, and Noah m. Eliza- 
beth Foot, May 26, 1765. 

3. Jacob, b. Oct. 26, 1766. 

4. Noah, b. Apr. 28, 1769. 

5. Amos, b. Jan. 28, 1771. 

Solomon Griggs m. Elizabeth Gridley, 
Feb. 19, 1778.^ 

1. Mary, b. Dec. 8, 1778. 

2. Joel, b. July 31, 1780. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 11, 1782. 



Griggs. Grilley. 

4. Solomon, b. Apr. 20, 1787. 

5. Ebenezer, b. Sept. 26, 1789. 

Caroline Grilley m. James Byrnes, 1844. 

Cyrus Grilley, s. of Jehulah, m. Lorain 

Strickland, d. of John, Oct. 10, 1776. 

1. John, b. Feb. 4, 1777. 

2. Freelove, b. Sept. 4, 1779. 

3. Lois, b. 

4. David Strickland, b. Dec. 8, 1782. 

Davis Grilley, s. of Silas, m. Jane C. 
Scovill, d. of Aaron, Apr., 1832. 

1. Helen M., b. May 6, 1833. 

2. Dwiuht, b. Sept. 3, 1834. 

Eunice Grilley m. L. Atkins, Jr., 1S4S. 
George Grilley, s. of Henry, and Adelia 

Benham from Burlington, b. Apr. 17, 

1S16, m. Apr. 24, 1834. 

1. George Marcellus, b. May 9, 1835. 

2. Sophia Adelia, b. Feb. 13, 1840. 

3. William Cowd, b. June 29, 1842. 

Henery Grilley, s. of Hew, m. Mercy 
Terrill, d. of Gamaliel, July 10, 1763. 

Easter, bap. June 22, 1766.- 

Henry Grilley m. Mercy Culver, d. of 
David of Southington, Feb. 24, 1772. 
[He d. Aug. 18, 1822] and she, Sept. 
16, 1S33, a. 91.- 

1. Henry, b. Dec. 20, 1772. 

2. Samuel, b. Oct. 31, 1774. 

3. Silas, b. Jan. 15, 1777. 

4. James, b. Dec. 24, 1778; d. Sept. 16, 1779. 

5. Ruth, b. Aug. 31, 1780. 

6. John, b. Jan. 13, 1784. 

7. David Clark, b. Jan. 6, 1786. 

Henry Grilley, s. of Henry, m. 1797, Ro- 
sanna Leva Perkins, d. of Edward of 
Bethany, b. Jan. 14, 1780. 

1. Edward Perkins, b. Nov. 1798. 

2. Julius, b. June, 1800. 

3. Harriet, b. June 16, 1803. 

4. George, b. Aug. 18, 1807. 

5. William, b. May 26, 1811; d. Oct. 3, 1837. 

6. Henry, b. Feb. 7, 1813. 

7. Leve Ann, b. May 5, 1815; m. Wm. Cowd. 

8. l-'.niily, b. July 22, 1819; m. J. P. Goodwin. 

Henry Grilley, Jr., s. of Henry, m. Emily 
Gunn, d. of Jarvis of Watertown, May 
3, 1840. 

1. Julia, b. June 30, 1844. 

2. George, b. Nov. 24, 1846. 

Hew Grely (Grilley). 

7. Daniel, b. July 5, 1743. 

Elizabeth, m. Amos Terrill, 1764. 

Ira F. Grilley of East Florence, N. Y., 
m. Marcia C. Castle, Mch. 16, 1S51. 

Jehulah Grilley, s. of Hew, m. Martha 
Welton, d. of Stephen, Apr. 9, 1754. 

1. Cyrus, b. Mch. 24, 1755. 

2. John, b. Oct. 22, 1756. 
Ede, bap. Sept. 15, 1765.2 
Annathe, (?) bnp. Jan. 27, 1771. 

Jeremiah Grilley, s. of Daniel, m. Anna 
Kellogg, d. of Jos., June, 18 12. 

1. Levi, b. Mch. 11, 1814. 

2. Alma, b. May i, 1816; m. Ed. Nichols. 



58 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Grilley. Garnsey. 

Jeremiah m. Sarah Ann Langdon of 

Cheshire, Apr. 21, 1S44. 
Julia Grilley m. L. Neal, Dec. 17, 1S21. 

Manly Grilley, s. of Cyrus, m. Betsey 
Mariah Olds, d. of David of Wash., May 
5, 1 82 1. (Another entry gives 1822). 

1. Marshall, b. Nov. 23, 1821. 

2. Georse, b. Aug. 29, 1823; d. Nov. 1842. 

3. Joseph, b. Sept. 2, 1S25. 

4. Albert, b. Feb. 6, 1828, in Washington. 

5. Frederic, b. Sept. 28, 1831, in Torriniiton. 

6. William, b. Mch. 2, 1836, in Torrington. 

Orrin Grilley, s. of Silas, m. Grace Jacobs 
from North Haven, Dec. 5, 1831. 

1. Orville, b. Oct. 2, 1832. 

2. Catharine, b. Nov. 22, 1834; d. I\lav 17, 1837. 

3. Edwin, b. Oct. 16, 1836. 

4. Thomas Mortimer, b. Aug. 2, 1845. 

Silas Grilley, s. of Henry, m. ^May 22, 
1800, Triphena Delano, d. of Thomas 
of Sharon, b. May 21, 1778. 

1. Orville, b. Feb. 1801; d. 1S06. 

2. Orrin, b. Aug. 1803. 

3. Clorinda, b. Feb. 1806; m. B. Perl^ins. 

4. Minerva, b. July, 1808; m. B. Stevens. 

5. Davis, b. Jan. 1811. 

6. Charles, b. July, 1813; d. 1815. 

7. Marietta, b. Feb. 1816. 

8. Eliza, b. Sept. 1818. 

Q. Charles, b. Sept. 181Q. 
10. Frederick, b. Sept. 1822. 

William Grilly m. Eunice A. Scott, Dec. 

9. iS33- 
John Grimsel m. Juha Merrel, Dec. 8, 

1850. 
Benjamin Grinnels of Litch. m. Harriet 
Johnson of I\Iiddlebury, Nov. 24, 1825. 

William L. Grennell of Penn., m. Ann 
E. Lloyd, Oct. 10, 1847. 

Abijah Garnsey (Guernsey), m. Lucy 
Bellamy, [d. of Joseph, D.D.] of Wood- 
bury, Aug. 19, 1772. 

Frances, b. Mch. 25, 1778. ' 

Silence, b. July 14, 1781. 

William, b. Jan. 25, 1784. 

Cambridge, a servant, b. May 16, 1777. 

Lydia, a servant, b. Mch. 14, 1781. 

Amos Garnsey, s. of Jonathan, m. Esther 
Blake, d. of Joseph, Feb. 15, 1756. 

1. Abigail, b. Nov. 9, 1756. 

2. Amos, b. Oct. 23, 1758. 

3. Esther, b. June 9, 1760. 

4. Joel, b. Jan. 11, 1763. 

5. Eldad, b. Sept 5, 1764. 

6. Annis, b. Jan. 30; d. July 16, 1766. 

7. Annis, b. June 24, 1767. 

8. Ruth, b. Mch. 2, 1769. 

9. Parthena, b. Mch. 6, 1771. " 

David Garnsey, s. of Jonathan, m. Han- 
nah Judd, d. of Samuel, June 6, 17^4. 
[She d. Feb. 28, 1776]. 

1. Hannah, b. June 21, 175 [5]- 

2. Sene, b. Sept. 19, 1756; m. C. Dayton. 

3. David, b. Mch. 3, 1738. 

4. Rebecca, b. May 23, 1760; m. Christ. Merriam. 

5. Olive, b. May 4, 1762; m. Jas. Merriam. 



Garn.sey. Guilford. 

John Garnsey, s. of Joseph of Milford, 

m. Anna Peck, d. of [Deac.] Jeremiah, 

Nov. 28, 1733. 

1. John, b. Oct. 28, 1734. 

2. Anna, b. Oct. 6, 1736. 

3. Peter, b. Nov. 13, 1738. 

4. Nathan, b. May 14, 1741. 

Jonathan Garnsey m. Abigail [Northrop, 
d. of Samuel of Milford, Jan. 6, 1724-5. 

1. Abigail, b. Oct., 1726; m. Eliphalet Clark. 

2. Jonathan, b. in Milford, Feb., 1729]. 

3. .\moz, b. July 13, 1731. 

4. David, b. Apr. 12, 1734. 

5. Sarah, b. July 7, 1736; m. Timothy Foot. 

6. Samuel, b. Feb. 8, 1738-9. 

7. Isaac, b. Dec. 11, 1741; [d. 1767 at Northampton] 

Abigail, d. Oct. 18, 1756, and Jonathan 
m. Desire vScovill, wid. [of Lieut. Will 
iam], ]\Ich. 10, 1757, who d. 1796, a. 87 

Jonathan Garnsey, s. of Jonathan, m 

Desire Bronson, d. of Jos., June 5, 1755 

1. Millesent, b. Mch. 24; d. Aug. 5, 1756. 

2. Millesent, b. May 21, 1757 [m. Titus Hotchkiss]. 

3. Daniel, b. July 18, 1760 [m. Huldah Seymour]. 

4. Southmayd, b. Apr. 10, 1763 [ra. Sabra Scott] . 

5. James, b. Mch. 27, 1767 [m. Annah Blakesley]. 
[Sidney, b. May 7, 1772]. 

Joseph Garnsey, s. of Joseph, m. Mary 
Brown, d. of Samuel, Apr. 30, 1754. 

1. Mary, b. June 14, 1755. 

2. Ann, b. Dec. 10, 1757; m. Aner Bradley. 

3. Chansey, b. Mch. 25, 1760. 

Joseph H. Guernsey, b. June 6, 1804, s. of 
Joseph of Watertown, and Elizabeth 
C. Turner, b. Nov. 26, 1812, d. of Jacob 
of Litchfield, m. Nov. 26, 1829. 

1. Elizabeth, b. Apr. lo; d. Sept. 7, 1834. 

2. Caroline, b. Nov. 9, 1836. 

3. Sheldon, b. Feb. 17; d. Apr. 19, 1839. 

4. Anthony, b. Apr. 19, 1840. 

5. Finett, b. Oct. 4, 1842. 

6. Jennet, b. Oct. 14, 1843. 

7. Joseph, b. Dec. 16, 1844; d. at Wol., 1845. 

8. Sarah P., b. Apr. i, 1847. 

Rhoda Garnsey m. David Hubbard, 1782.' 

Samuel Gernsey, s. of Jonathan, m. Ra- 
chel Lattimore of Middletown, May 10, 
1764. 

1. Samuel, b. Apr. 1765. 

Rachel, d. July 9, 1765, and Samuel, m. 
Concurrance Smedley, Nov. 13, 1766. 

2. Rachel, b. Aug. 13, 1767. 

3. Rene, b. May 22, 1770. 

4. Concurrance, b. May 28, 1772. 

Samuel Garnsey's wid. Naomi, d. Jan. 

17, 1822, [a. 86]. 

Charles Guilford, s. of Joshua, m. Helen 
Carr, d. of Ljmian of New Hartford, 
June 13, 1839. 

1. Nancy Maria, b. May 17, 1840. 

2. George S., b. Apr. 5, 1842. 

^. Mary Emeline, b. Dec. 9, 1845. 

George W. Guilford m. Lora Rice, Oct. 

18, 1827. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



ap59 



Guilford. Gunn. 

Joshua Guilford, b. Feb. 15, 1792, s. of 
Simeon of Williamsburgh, Mass., and 
Elizabetli Smith, b. Nov. 22, 1803, d. of 
Allen of Plainfield, Mass., m. June, 
1824. 

1. Mary, b. in Cummington Mass., June i8, 1825. 

2. Simeon B., b. in Manchester, Mass., July 21; d. 

Nov. 1827. 

3. Anson Bolivar, b. at Auburn, N. Y., Apr. 21, 

1830. 

4. Simeon Dudley, b. at Pittsfield, Feb. 6, 1832; d. 

1833- 

5. Delany (?) Jane, b. at Pittsfield, Nov. 7, 1833. 

6. Joshua, b. at Pittsfield, Nov. 16, 1835; d. 1836. 

7. Esther, b. at Pittsfield, Mch. 21, 1838. 

8. William Henry Harrison, b. Feb. 3, 1840. 

9. Elizabeth Smith, b. Jan. 24, 1842. 

10. Electa Gay, b. Nov. 22, 1844; d. 1S46. 

11. Charles, (?) b. June 4, 1847. 

Michael Guilford, s. of Timothy of Will- 
iamsburgh, Mass., m. Anna Hall, d. of 
Moses R., Nov. 27, 181 1. 

1. Jane Ann, b. in Hardwick, Sept. 23, 1812. 

2. Charlotte, b. in Hardwick, Mass., Apr. 10, 1815; 

m. Allen Clark. 

3. Sarah, b. in Hardwick, Feb. 8, 1818. 

4. Ralph Hall, b. in Cum., Jan. 11, 1820. 

5. Betsey Eliz., b. in Plain., Mch. 15, 1822; d. 

1825. 

6. Lvdia Brown, b. in Plain., Jan. i, 1824; d. 1826. 

7. Rebecca Eliz., b. July 26, 1826; d. Feb. 26, 1836. 

8. Timothy, b. Aug. 30, 1828. 

9. Moses Edgar, b. Oct. 17, 1830; d. Mch. 18, 1836. 

10. William Oscar, b. in Wolcott, Oct. 20, 1833. 

Ruhamah Guilford m. J. S. Hayden, 1819. 

[Abel Gunn, s. of Nathl., m. Abigail Da- 
vis of Derby, Dec. 2, 1756. 

I. Sarah, b. Sept. 25, 1759]. 

Abel Gunn, s. of Nathl. (2d), m. Joanna 
Chatfield, d. of Sam., Jan. 19, 1784. 

1. Silas, b. Dec. 20, 1784. 

2. Ransom, b. June 9, 1787 [m. Mary Nichols]. 

3. Abel Festus, b. Aug. 7, 1793 [m. Ranny Hine] . 

4. Ame, b. Mch. 14, 1799 [m. Caleb INIain]. 

Emeline H, Gunn m. T. B. Davis, 1S40. 

Emily Gunn ni. Henry Grilley, Jr., 1S40. 

Enos Gunn, s. of Nathaniel, m. Abigail 
Candee, d. of Gideon, Jan. 13, 1763. 

1. Samuel, b. Oct. 25, 1763. 

2. Abigail, b. July 8, 1765 [ni. Noah Scovill]. 

3. Sarah, b. Oct. 14, 1767 [m. Lera. Welton]. 

4. Hannah, ) m. Larraon Townsend. 

and )-b. Nov. 3, 1770. 

5. Enos, ) m.' Hannah BurriU. 

6. Asa, b. Apr. 30, 1773. 

7. Daniel, b. Mch. 26, 1777. 

Jobamah Gunn [s. of Nathaniel], m. 
Hannah Candee, Feb. 6, 1772. 

1. Isaiah, b. Feb. 20, 1773 [m. Ehz. Hull]. 

2. John, b. Dec. 24, 1775 [m. Amelia Hull]. 

3. Mehitabel, b. Mch. 22, 1777 [m. Joel Hull]. 

4. Hannah, b. Aug. 19, 1779 [m. Moses Wood]. 

5. Jobamah, b. Nov. 23, 1781. 

6. Esther, b. Feb. 25, 1784. 

7. Isaac, b. June s, 1786 [m. Polly Riggs, (b. Feb. 

22, 1786; d. Oct. 7, 1813), and Huldah Riggs, 
(b. July 10, 1796), dau's of John Riggs. He 
d. Sept. 26, 1846]. 



GuNN. Hagadon. 

Nathaniel Gunn, s. of Abel and Agnes 

(Hawkins) m. Sarah Wheeler — all of 

Derby — Dec. 10, 172S. 

1. Mary, b. in Derby, Jan. 12, 1730; m. D. Woos- 

ter. 

2. Sarah, b. in Derby, Feb. 15, 1732; m. Capt. Ja- 

bez Thompson of Derby, Oct. 25, 1748]. 

3. Abel, b. Aug. 12, 1734. 

4. Nathaniel, b. Sept. 16, 1736. 

5. Enos, b. Aug. 30, 1738. 

6. Abigail, b. Jan. 13, 1740 [m. John Smith]. 

7. Hannah, b. Aug. 2, 1743 [m. ■ Miles]. 

8. Anne, b. Mch 11, 1745-6. 

9. Jobamah, b. Aug. 20, 1748. 

10. Samuel, b. July 13, 1751; d. Sept. 15, 1753. 

Sarah d. Mch. 8, 1756, and Nathaniel 
m. Sarah [Smith] Cambe (Candee), wid. 
of Gideon of W. Haven, June 30, 1757. 
He d. Oct. 25, 1769. 

11. Loes, b. Mch. 7, 1758 [m. Sim. Beebeof Kent]. 

12. Mehitable, b. June 6, 1759 [d. 1776]. 

13. Agnis, b. May 26, 1762 [ra. Benjamin Welton ?]. 

Nathaniel Gunn, Jr., s. of Nathaniel, m. 
Elizabeth Downs, d. of Nathl., of New 
Haven, Apr. 7, 1763. 

1. Abel, b. Jan. 26, 1764. 

2. Nathaniel, b. Sept. 26, 1766. 

3. Hannah, b. Nov. 11, 1768. 

4. Elizabetli, b. Jan. 3, 1771; m. Dan. Osborn. 
=;. Bede, b. July 16, 1773; m. J. Blakeslee. 

6. Sarah, b. Oct. 25, 1775; m. R. Welton, Jr. 

7. Ame, b. Apr. 23, 1779. 

[8. Charlotte, b. 1781; m. Sher. Leavenworth]. 

Nathaniel Gunn, Jr., s. of Nathaniel 
(above), m. Deliverance Harrison, d. 
of Samuel, March 31, 1793. She d. 
Mch. I, 1S25. 

1. Vinson, b. May 4, 1794. 

2. Jarvis, b. Nov. 29, 1798; d. Aug. 1S29. 

3. Sally, b. Oct. 29, 1804. 

[Rev. Samuel Gunn, s. of Enos, m. 
Joanna Warner, d. of Ard, Apr. 4, 17S5. 

1. Havila, b. Apr. 19, 1786. 

2. Leveret, b. Jan. 11, 1788. 

3. Zena, b. Apr. 15, 1790. 

4. Garry, b. Apr. 7, 1792. 

5. Amanda, b. July 30, 1793. 

6. Samuel, b. Aug. 6, 1795. 

7. Apama, b. Dec. 16, 1797. 

8. Enos, b. Mch. 8, 1800. 

9. Hannah, b. Apr. 2, 1802; killed by falling from 

the wagon, while the family was crossing the 
AUeghanies, en route for Ohio, Nov. 11, 1805. 

10. Bela, b. Sept. 6, 1804. 

" This account taken from his own well 
worn pocket-book." Rev. Sam. Gunn 
d. at Portsmouth, O., Aug. 25, 1832]. 

Silas Gunn from Oxford m. Theodosia 
Johnson of Salem, Nov. 26, 1826. 

Vinson Gunn, s. of Nathaniel, m. Julia 
Welton, May 13, 1S12. 

1. Lucia Diana, b. Apr. 20, 1813. 

2. Olive Semantha, b. Mch. 11, 1824. 

3. Delia Amanda, b. Apr. 6, 1825. 

4. Lent Eells, b. May 6, 1832. 

5. Mary Ellen, b. Apr. 26, 1834. 

Jacob Hagadon m. Jane Reynolds, June 
23, 1S30. 



60 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Hai.k. IIaii.. 

Elizabeth Hale m. Dan. Hawkins, 174S. 
Reuben Hail m. Diantha Ward, Aug 29, 

1759- (To Hartland in 1772.*') 
Tamer Hale m. Elisha Lewis, 1750. 
Abigail Hall m. Ozias Langdon, 1S32. 
Anna Hall m. Philo Mix, 1797. 
Anna Hall m. ^Michael Guilford, iSii. 
Benjamin Hall:" 

Lyman, b. Aug. 7, 17S4. 
Kenjamin, b. Mch. 29, 17S7. 
Orison, b. Dec. 4, 1780. 

Clerana Hall ni. Seabury Pierpont, 1813. 

Daniel Hall, b. Jan. 11, 177S, s, of Jonah, 
m. Abigail Finch, d. of Gideon of Wol- 
cott, who d. Jan. 2, 1S41. 

i.(?) Sarah, b. Oct. 30, 1809. 

2. Leonard, b. Sept. 27, 1806. 

3. Joel, b. Oct., 1813; d. Oct. 29, 1838. 

4. Edward, b. Dec, 1815. 

5. Isaac, b. Apr. 2, 1817. 

6. Minerva, b. iMch., 1820; m. W. N. Russell, 1836. 

Eliazer Hall, s. of Nathaniel, m. Lidia 
Prichard, d. of Amos, June 10, 17S9. 

I. Irenia, b. Nov. if, 1789. 

Emeline Hall m. C. Richardson, 1829. 

George A. Hall of Cheshire m. Harriet 

Nichols, Apr. 25, 1S36. 
Harvey C. Hall m. Jannette L. Scarrett, 

Oct. 7, 1S50. 
Jennet C. Hall m. S. H. Prichard, 1S37. 

Jared Seely Hall, s. of Jared of Cheshire, 
m. Rowena Parker, d. of Zephna of 
Wolcott, Mch. 2, 1S17. 

1. Almira, b. Sept. 6, 1819; m. Ives Lewis.? 

2. Salina, b. Jan. 4, 1823. 

3. Esther, b. June, 1825. 

Rowena d. Nov. 2, 1S32, and Jared m. 
Polly Welton, d. of Erastus, May 15, 
1834. 

I. William, b. Oct. 25, 1841; d. June 2, 1846. 

John C. Hall m. JaneMerterof Norwich, 
Feb. 27, 1S48. 

Leonard Hall, s. of Daniel, m. Elizabeth 
Hungerford, Mch. 22, 1S32. 

1. Nelson, b. July 22, 1834. 

2. Henry, b. i\Iay i, 1837. 

Luman Hall of Plymouth m. Henrietta 
French, Apr. 21, 1850. 

Luther Hall, b. Aug. 26, 1807, s. of Au- 
gustus, and Maria H. Ives, b. July 12, 
1813, d. of Titus — all of Meriden — m. 
Sept. 16, 1S33. 

1. Susan Lodima, b. in Meriden, Feb. 21, 1S37. 

2. Ellen !Maria, b. Feb. 21, 1840. 

3. Luther Ives, b. July 2, 1842; d. Nov. 19, 1846. 

Lydia Hall m. Enoch W. Frost, 1S23. 
Mabel Hall m. J. M. Daggett, 1S31. 
Margaret Hall m. Jon. Prindle, 1768. 



Hail. Hammond. 

Maria L. Hall m. C. L. Hurd, 1S43. 

Mary Hall m. W. M. Pemberton, 1821. 

Mary Hall m. Garry Lewis, 1823. 

Mary Ann Hall m. J. A. Bunnell, 1839. 

Moses Hall, s. of Curtiss, late of Wol- 
cott, dcc'd, m. Olive Porter, d. of Doct. 
Timothy, dec'd, Feb. 26, 1S03. 

1. Nelson, b. Jan. 20, 1804. 

2. Hopkins Porter, b Dec. 27, 1808. 

3. Samuel Wni. Southmayd, b. July 5, 1S14. 

4. Olive Margaret, b. Juiie 25, 1816; m. J. P. Elton. 

Nathaniel and Margery Hall: 

He d. Jan. 16, 1S03. 

2. Tamer, b. Dec. 28, 1760; m. Aseph Brown. 

3. Eunice, b. Apr. 28, 1763. 

4. E.sther Humbervile, b. Aug. 11, 1765. 

5. Moses Royc, b. Nov. 3, 1768. 

6. Eliezer, b. Mch. 26, 1771. 

7. Samuel Moss, b. June 14, 1773. 

8. Hannah Royce, b. July 31, 1777. 

9. Joses, b. June 6, 1781; d. Mch. 8, 1835, a. 54.'^ 

10. Harmon, b. Aug. 18, 1783. 

11. Rhoda, b. Oct. 8, 17S7; m. Titus Scott, 1S08. 

Nelson Hall and Lorinda Marshall were 
joined in holy matrimony in Saint 
John's Church, Apr. 27, 182S. 

Phebe Hall m. Joseph Atkins, 1767. 

Preston Hall m. Lucy Webster, Apr. 14, 

1839- 
Rebecca Hall m. W. H. Payne, 1S29. 
Roxana Hall m. L. S. Stevens, 1838. 
Sally B. Hall m. Elon Clark, 1827. 

Samuel W. [S.] Hall m. Nancy M. Aus- 
tin [d. of Edmund], Oct. 10, 1836. 

Sarah Hall m. Benjamin Benham, 1756. 
Sarah Hall m. Orrin Austin, 181 1. 
Sidney Hall m. Abigail Potter, Sept. 19, 

1S30. 
William Hall m. Rebecca Piatt Root in 

England. 

I. William Henry, b. Oct. 7, 1846. 

Christopher Halpin m. Catharine Early, 

Feb. 5, 1S51. 
John and Abigail Hamalton: 

I. Mary, b. May 22, 1735. 

William Hammill of Little Falls, N. Y., 

m. Dorcas F. Sanford, d. of Asa, July 

8, 182S. 
Thomas Hammond, s. of Caleb, m. 

Thankful Warner, d. of Samuel, dec'd, 

Dec. 20, 1752. 

1. Patience, b. Apr. 20, 1755; m. Isaac Judd, 1775. 

2. Thankful, and one still-born, May 10, 1757. 

4. Orrange, b. Jan. 14, 1760; m. Thadde Scott, 

1781. 

Thankful d. July 26, 1760, and Thomas, 
s. of Caleb, dec'd, m. Sarah, wid. of 
Edm. Scott, Oct. 21, 1761, who d. Jan. 
I. 1777- 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP61 



Hammond. 



Harrison. 



5. Thomas, b. Aug. 14, 1762. 

6. Sarah, b. June 26; d. Sept. 15, 1764. 

7. Joseph, b. June 12; d. July 3, 1765. 

8. Samuel, b. Feb. 15, 1767; d. Aug. 24, 1773. 

9. Joseph,), -^^^ ^g gg t.vin child d. Jan. 

.t""^ \ 10,1769. 

10. Mary, ) 1 / y 

11. .\nna, b. Apr. 16, 1771: d. Aug. 26, 1773. 

12. Sarah Jemima, b. Dec. 13, 1773. 
i^. J.ames, b. Dec. 16, 1775. 

I Thomas Hammond of Watertown had, 

Au'<'. , 17S2, wife Sarah, wid. of James 
Doolittlc] 
Thomas Hammond, Jr. m. Lydia Ives, 
Nov. 12, 1783. '-^ 

I. Hannah, b. May 13, 17S4. 

Lovisa Hanks m. W. C. Boon, 1S29. 

Aron Harrison, s. of Benj., m. Jerusha 
Warner, d. of Obad., Oct. 26, 174S. 

1. Jared, b. Oct. 13, 1740. 

2. Mark, b. Apr. 9, 1751. 

3. Samuel, b. Mch. 15, 1753. 

4. David, b. Mch. 14, 1756. 

5. John, b. Dec. 3, 1758 [d. Nov. 10, 1776, with the 

army.] 

6. Lucy, b. Mch. i, 1762. 

Abigail Harrison m. David Warner, 1753. 

Abigail Harrison m. S. S. Camp, 1832. 

Benjamin Harrison, s. of Benjamin, m. 
Dinah Warner, d. of Benj., Dec. 24, 
1741, and d. Mch. 13, 1760, in his 39th 
year. Dinah m. Moses Cook. 

1. James, b. Oct. 28, 1742; d. Oct. 25, 1760. 

2. Jabez, b. Oct. 11, 1744. 

3. Lydia, b. Sept. 24, 1747; d. Aug. 6, 1750. 

4. Samuel, b. and d. Sept. 4, 1750. 

5. Rosel, b. Dec. 20, 1751; d. t)ec. 13, 1764. 

6. Daniel, b. July 15, 1754. 

Benjamin [s. of Thomas of Branford], 
father of the above Benj., d. Mch. 6, 
1760, a. 61. [Their wills, dated same 
day.] Mary [Sutliff], wid. of Benja- 
min, m. Thomas Clark. 

Caroline Harrison m. G. F. Hitchcock, 
1S49. 

Daniel Harrison m. Phebe Blakeslee, 
Jan. 13, 1774. 

Deliverence Harrison m. Nathl. Gunn, 
Jr., 1793- 

Frances Harrison m. Ely Piatt, 1S51. 

Jabez Harrison m. Deborah Johnson, 
Oct. 15, 1772. 

I. Cloe, b. Jan. 23, 1776. 

Jared Harrison and Hannah:- 

1. Daniel, b. May 6, 1771. 

2. Rozel, b. May 2, 1773. 

3. Benjamin, b. May 15, 1775. 

4. John, b. Dec. 10, 1777. 

5. Ruth, b. May 15, 1780. 

These y;j?/r preceding ones b. in Southington. 

6. Jared, b. Nov. 8, 1782. 

7. Hannah, b. Oct. 26, 1787. 

Lemuel Harrison [b. Nov. 17, 1765, at 
Litchfield], s. of Lemuel, m. Sarah 



Harrison. Hawley. 

Clark, d. of Thomas, dec'd, Mch. 4, 
1790. 

1. James, b. Aug. 2, 1791. 

2. Sophia, b. Nov. 10, 1793; m. Festus Hayden. 
[3. Maria, b. Aug. 17, 1796. 

4. Garry, b. Sept. 19, 179S. 

5. Stephen, b. Oct. 21, 1800; d. Oct. 19, 1820. 

6. Edwin, b. Sept. 20, 1809; d. young.] 

Rosannah Harrison, wid. [of Michael]:' 

Sarah, Maria, and Reliecca (who m. J. P. 
Somers), liap. Apr. 28, 181Q. 

Stephen E. Harrison [s. of Garry] m. 

Catharine Summers [d. of Jame.s], Oct. 

II, 1S47. 
Alva C. Hart of Marshall, N. Y., m. 

Catharine S. Smith of Nan., Aug. 4, 

1S41. 
Rev. Ira Hart m. Maria Sherman, d. of 

John, Dec. 3, 1798. 

1. David Sherman, b. Sept. 24, 1799. 

2. Charles Theodore, b. June 14, 1801. 

3. Harriet Eliza, b. Mch. 11, 1S03. 

Eliphalet Hartshorn, Jr., m. Rebekah 
Worden, Dec. 19, 176S. 

1. Eubulus, b. Feb. 7, 1770. 

2. Phebe, b. May 8, 1772. 

3. Daniel, b. Jan. 3, 1774. 

4. Alithea, b. Apr. 14, 1776.* 

5. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 2, 1778. 

6. Eliphalet, b. Nov. 29, 1780. 

7. Rebeckah, b. Feb. 26, 1783. 

8. Harvey, b. Aug. i; d. Nov. 24, 1785. 

9. Lois, b. Nov. 7, 1786. 
10. Henry, b. Jan. 26, 17S0. 

Mary Hartshorn m. Jos. Lothrop, 1735. 

Sheldon S. Hartshorn of Derby m. Cyn- 
thia Boughton, July 30, 1S36. 

Voadice Hartshorn m. Sam. Scovill, 1764. 

John and Adeline Hatch:' 

Adeline, bap. i\Ich. 5, 1837. 

Cyrus Hawkins m. Olive Towner, May 
16, iSii. 

Daniel Hawkins of Derby m. Elizabeth 
Hale, d. of Samuel of New Haven, 
Oct. 9, 1748. 

1. Dorcas, b. June 6. 1749. 

2. Elizabeth, b. Jan. 19, 1750-1. 

3. Ann; b. May 2, 1752. 

4. Sarah, b. Sept. 4, 1753. 

5. Mary, b. Apr. 17, 1755. 

6. Apame, b. June 16, 1757. 

7. Daniel, b. Sept. 17, 1759. 

8. Noah, b. Apr. 2, 1761. 

Esther Hawkins m. Dr. Abel Bronson, 

17S4. 

Mary Hawkins m. Ebenezer Judd, 1742. 

Miriam Hawkins m. Samuel Richards, 
1734, and Thomas Hickox, 1736. 

Hanna Hawks, d. of John of Deerfield, 
m. Jon. Scott, 1694. 

Abigail Hawley m. Sam. Royce, 1780.^ 

Mary Hawley m. Ira Yale, 1830. 



62 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Hayden. Hennessy. 

Daniel Hayden, b. Mch. 25, 1780, s. of 
Josiah of Williamsburgh, Mass., and 
Abigail Shepard, b. Apr. i, 1775, d. of 
Joseph of Foxbury, Mass., m. Aug. 20, 
iSoi. 

1. Joseph Shepard, b. July 31, 1802. 

2. Abby Hewes, b. Nov. 27, 1804; m. J. S. Kings- 

bury. 

3. Ardelia Crode.b. Dec. 25, 1806; m. Israel Holmes. 

4. Sylvia Shepard, b. Nov. 25, 1809; d. Feb. i, 1819. 

5. Harriet Hodges, b. Nov. 3, 1812. 

[David Hayden b. 1778, m. Betsey Bish- 
op of Attleborough, Mass., 1797. 

1. Willard Boyd, b. 1799. 

2. David, b. 1801. 

3. Eliza Maria, b. 1803; m. T. Loveland. 

4. Harriet Sophia, b. 1807. 

5. Lorenzo Bishop, b. iSio. 

6. Betsey, b. P"eb. 11, 1813. 

7. Jane, b. 1816 (all these bap. 1816.I) 

8. Charles Sylvester, b. 1820J. 

Festus Hayden, b. Feb. iq, 1793, s. of 
Cotton [and Sally Miller] of Williams- 
burgh, m. Sophia Harrison, d. of Lem- 
iael,"Feb. 10, 1S16. 

1. Maria L., b. Aug. 16, 1818. 

2. Henry H., b. Apr. 2, 1820. 

3. Mary E., b. Mch. 13, 1823; m. Ed. Bancroft. 

4. James A., b. Mch. 8, 1825. 

Joseph Shepard Hayden, s. of Dan., m. 
Ruhamah Guilford, d. of Simeon, Jan. 
10, 1819, who d. Nov. 27, 1841. 

1. Hiram Wasliington, b. Feb. 10, 1820. 

2. Edward Simeon, b. Oct. i, 1825. 

Willard Hayden and Sarah: 

I. Willard Williams, bap. July 6, 1823. 

George B. Hazard of Canterbury m. 
Susan JauL' Clark, Aug. 22, 1841. 

Reuben S. Hazen of Springfield m. Ma- 
ria A. Wood, d. of Rev. Luke, July 
26, 1821. 

John Healy m. Catharine Lannan, Feb. 
20, 1S48. 

William Healy m. Cath. Devricks, May 
20, 1S4S. 

Martha Heath m. J. Robinson, 1S29. 

Mary Heath m. Dan. Boice. 

Abraham Heaton and Mabel: 

1. Sar.ih, h. Apr. 23, 1772. 

2. Levi, b. Jan. 14, 1774. 

3. Abram, b. July 14, 1776.4 

4. Mabel, b. Nov. 2, 1778; d. Feb. 2, 1780. 

5. Mabel, b. Dec. 19, 1780. 

6. Ira, b. June 5, 1783. 

7. Joel, b. Nov. 10, 1787. 

Jacob Hemingway and Abigail:^ 

Lncretia, b. in Branford, May 11, 17S5. 
Nancy, b. < )ct. 21, 1788. 

Elizabeth Hendrick m. John Walton. 

1738. 
John Hendrick and Martha [Barret ?] 

Jdhn Barrit, b. Aug. 3, 1778. 

Ambrose P. Hennessy m. Betsey Whit- 
lock, June 5, 1836. 



Hennessy. Hikcox. 

James Hennessy m. Bridget , — 

both of Wolcottville — Apr. 20, 1849. 

Abraham Hikcox, s. of Samuel, m. Jem- 
ima Foot, d. of Thomas, Apr. 19, 1748, 
who d. May 20, 1779. [He died in the 
British army]. 

1. Mary, b. July 2, 1748; m. Seba Bronson. 

2. Lucy, b. Feb. 13, 1749-50; m. Simeon Scott. 

3. Jesse, b. Apr. 12, 1752. 

4. [ered, b. Jan. 15, 1756. 

5. Joel, b. Apr. 8, 1758 [d. in Penn., 1S17]. 

6. 'rimothy, b. Jan. 5, 1761. 

7. Abraham, b. June 2, 1765. 

8. Samuel, b. Jan. i, 1767. 

9. Preserve, b. Nov. 6, 1768. 

Abraham Hikcox, s. of Capt. Abr., dec'd, 
m. Tamar Tuttle, d. of Jabez, dec'd, 
Feb. 24, 1784. 

1. Ruth, b. Nov. 9, 1785. 

2. Oracena, b. Nov. 11, 1788. 

Amarilla Hickcox m. Isaac Porter, 1799. 

Ambrose Hikcox, s. of Ebenezer, m. 
Eunice Clark, d. of Caleb, Dec. 11, 
1740 [d. June I, 1792]. 

1. Ambrose, b. Aug. 28, 1741. 

2. Ruth, b. Dec. 18, 1743; m. Abijah Wilmot. 

3. Gideon, b. Apr. 19, 1746; d. Dec. 12, 1763. 

4. Margerum, b. Oct. 6, 1748. 

5. Marcy, b. Sept. 26, 1752 [m. Joel JuddJ. 

6. Ebenezer, b. May 29, 1754. 

7. Benjamin, b. Apr. 19, 1756; d. Nov. 11, 1769. 

Ambrose Hikcox, s. of Ambrose, m. 
Mary Dowd, d. of John of Middle- 
town, June 10, 1762. [She d. Mch. 17, 
1793]- 

1. Eunice, b. Dec. i, 1762. 

2. Gideon, b. July 18, 1764. 

Amos Hikcox, s. of Thomas, dec'd, m. 
Mary Richards, wid. of Benj., May 15, 
1740. [She d. July 19, 1787, he d. Mch. 
I, 1805]. 

1. Freelove, b. Apr. 28, 1741; m. Stephen Scott. 

2. Amos, b. Mch. 18, 1742-3; d. July 31, 1749. 

3. Elisha, b. Mch. 3, 1744-5. 

4. ]\Iarcy, b. Jan. 25, 1746-7; d- Ju'.v 7. 1752- 

5. Amos, b. Nov. 12, 1749. 

6. Joseph, b. Mch. 12, 1752. 

Benjamin Hickox, s. of John [and 
Eunice], m. Sarah Warner, d. of Reu- 
ben, June 10, 1783. 

1. Darius, b. June 30, 1783. 

2. Sarah, b. May 6, 1785. 

3. Laura, b. Sept. 17, 1786. 

4. Israel, b. Mch. 9, 1788. 

5. Phebe, b. Apr. 5, 1791. 

6. Benjamin Warner, b. Dec. 26, 1794. 

7. John, b. Jan. 2, 1797. 

Sarah d. Jan. 19, 1797, and Benj. m. 
Zerviah Sutliff, d. of Joseph of Wol- 
cott, Dec. 3, 1797- 

8. Leveret, j d. Dec. 12, 1798. 

and \h. July 31, 1798. 
g. Lydia, ) 
10. Polly Zerviah, b. Oct. 23, 1802. 

Daniel Hikcox, s. of Deac. Thomas (2d), 
m. Sibel Bartholemu, Jan. 15, 1766. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP63 



HiKCOX. HiCKOX. 

1. Caleb, b. Oct. i8, 1766. 

2. Daniel, b. Feb. 11, 1769. 

3. Mary, b. May 5, 1771; d. Feb. 7, 1772. 

4. Chancy, b. July 21, 1773. 

Sibel d. Apr. 2, 1774, and Daniel m. 
Phebe Orton, July 5, i775-^ 

5. Eliazer, b. July 25, 1776. 

6. Mary, b. Jan. 23, 177S. 

7. Uri, b. Aug. 8, 1779. 

8. Merriam, b. Aug. i, 1781. 

9. Sybbel, b. Oct. 13, 1783. 

David Hikcox, s. of John of Great Bar- 
rington, m. Adah Baldwin, d. of 
Richard of Woodbridge, Nov. 13, 1794. 

1. Horace, b. Oct. 18, 1795. 

2. Addison, b. May 22, 1798. 

3. Abiah, b. Apr. 3, 1800. 

Ebenezer Hikcox, s. of Samuel, m. Es- 
ther Hine, d. of Thomas, Dec, 1714. 

1. Esther, b. June 10, 1715; m. Stephen Kelsey. 

2. Samuel, b. Dec. 20, 1716. 

3. Ambrus, b. Sept. 2, 1718. 

4. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 2, 1720; m. Rich. Nichols. 

5. Abigail, b. Aug. 8, 1722: ni. James Prichard. 

Ebenezer m. [Abigail] Stevens, d. of 
Samuel of West Haven, Aug. 2S, 1729. 
(Was he in Danbury, 1736-41?) 

6. Ebenezer, b. July 21, 1730. 

7. David, b. Jan. 20, 1731-2. 

8. John, b. Apr. 17, 1734. 
12. Seth. b. Dec. 5, 1741. 

Elisha Hikcox, s. of Lieut. Amos, m. 
Thankful Willard, Oct. iS, 1764. 

Elizabeth Hikcox: 

Anna Lewis, her dau., b. Feb. 5, 1776. 

Gideon Hikcox, s. of Sam. (2d), dec'd, m. 
Sarah Upson, d. of Stephen, Aug. 15, 
1734, who d. Jan. 19, 1809, a. 94.* 

James, b. Feb. 11, 1734-5; drowned Feb., 1744-5. 

Jemima, b. Nov. 24, 1736; m. Ira Beebe. 

Samuel, b. Sept. 11, 1739. 

Sarah, b. June 3, 1744; ra. Austin Smith. 

James, b. Nov. 28, 1746. 

Lucy, b. June 20, 1749. 

Gideon, b. May 4, 1752. 

Elizabeth, b. Nov. 28, 1764. 

Gideon Hickcox, Jr., s. of Gideon, m. 
Philena Smith, d. of Austin, Aug. 29, 
1771- 

1. David, b. Dec. 3, 1772. 

2. Sarah, b. Apr. 15, 1774. 

3. Polly, b. Mch. 4, 1777. 

4. Hannah Smith, b. July 2, 1781. 

Hannah Hikcox of Woodbury m. O. 

Richards, 1732. 
James Hikcox, s. of Gideon, m. Hannah 

Smith, d. of Austin, Nov. 28, 1766. 

I. Olive, b. May 7, 1774. 

James Hickox m. Eunice Collins, Nov. 
12, 1777.3 

1. Collins, b. Oct. 15, 1778. 

2. James, b. Nov. 26, 1780. 

3. Sally, b. 

James M. Hickox of New Haven m. 
Hannah Culver, Feb. 2, 1845. 



Hickcox. Hickcox. 

Jared Hickcox, s. of Capt. Abraham, m. 

Rachel Merrills, d. of Caleb, Feb. 7, 

1777. 

1. Lucy, b. Dec. 6, 1777. 

2. Nathaniel, b. Feb. 16, 1779. 

3. Jamime, b. Apr. 25, 1780. 

4. Hannah, b. Dec. 12, 1782: d. July, 1785. 

5. Hannah, b. July 22, 1785. 

6. Azor, b. Sept. 12, 1787. 

7. Eri, b. Feb. 19, 1790. 

8. Esther, b. Sept. 30, 1792. 

9. Jared, b. June 8, 1794. 
10. Rachel, b. Sept. 5, 1797. 

Jesse Hikcox, s. of Abraham, m. Han- 
nah Strong, July 27, 1775. 

1. Zcnas, b. June 7, 1776. 

2. Molly, b. Dec. 17, 1777. 

Hannah d. Dec. 21, 177S, and Jesse m. 
Rhoda Thomas, Apr. 26, 1780. She d. 
Feb. 26, 17S1 (a son having been b. and 
d. Feb. 14); Jesse m. Hannah Tomp- 
kins, relict of Nathaniel, Aug. 16, 1781. 
John Hikcox, s. of Samuel (and Eliza- 
beth Plumb), m. Marah Gaylord, d. of 
Joseph of Durham, Nov. 18, 1719. 

[Sept. 3, 1765. Agreement of heirs of John 
Hikcox, signed by ]\Iary, the widow; John 
Hikco.x, Benj. and Thankful Brooks, Eben. 
and Hepsibah Barnes, John and Mary 
Thomas, Thomas and Ruth Brooks.] 

John Hikcox, s. of John (above), [m. 
Eunice Warner, d. of Dr. Benj.]. His 
hrst child that was b. in Waterbury. 

1. Derius, b. Sept. 5, 175S. 

2. Reubin, b. Dec. 15, 1760. 

3. Cloe, b. Jan. 31, 1763. 

4. Benjamin, b. Dec. 22, 1764. 

5. Lucy, b. INIch. 20, 1767. 

6. David, b. Apr. 21, 1772. [To Great Barring- 

ton .'] 

7. John Warner, b. Aug. 4, 1774. 

John Hikcox d. on the island called 
Neworland, Nov. 21, 1774, and Eunice 
m. Thomas Richason. 
John Hikcox, s. of Capt. Samuel (and 
Mary Hopkins), m. Anne Warner, d. of 
Dr. Benjamin, July i, 1754. 

1. Asa, b. Jan. 23, 1755. 

2. Joanne, b. Sept. 7, 1756. 

3. Sabra, b. Aug. 21, 1759. 

4. Aner, b. Mch. 24, 1761. 

5. Leucinda, b. Mch. 6, 1763. 

6. John, b. Jan. 14, 1765. 

7. Mary, b. Mch. 16, 1767. 

8. William Warner, b. Feb. i, 1769. 
Q. Sarah Anna, b. Jan. 17, 1771. 

John Hikcox (s. of John, above) m. Lydia 
Cook, d. of Moses, May i, 1786. 

1. Carlos Vanjulius, b. Feb. 9; d. Aug. 4, 1787. 

2. Alonzo Grandison, b. July 22, 1788. 

3. Sidney, b. July 17, 1790; d. Aug. 31, 1791. 

4. Sidney, b. Aug. 31, 1792; d. Aug. 11, 1794. 

5. Asa William Warner, b. Apr. i, 1795. 

6. Carlos Vanjulius, b. Sept. 30, 1797. 

Jonas Hickcox, s. of Samuel, Jr., m. 
Abigail Clark, d. of Eliphalet, dec'd, 
May 10, 1764. [She d. Dec, 1783; he, 
Sept., 1826.] 



64 Ap 



EI8T0RT OF WATERS URT. 



HiKCOX. HiKCOX. 

[Joseph Hikcox d. in Woodbury, 16S7, 
leaving 

Joseph, b. about 1673. 

Dr. Benjamin, b. about 1675. 

Mary, b. about 1678; m. Joseph Gavlord, Jr. 

EHzabeth, b. about 1681; m. John Gaylord. 

Samuel, b. 1687.] 

Joseph Hikcox, s. of Serg. Samuel, m. 

Elizabeth Gaylord, d. to Josej^h, Sr., 

this Sd of Feb., 1699 or 1700. 

Julia E. Hikcox m. C. B. Bassett, 1S51. 

Lewis A. Hickcox [s. of Rev. Jonas] m. 
Lydia Hickcox, Sept. 27, 1826. 

I. Mary So|)hronia, bap. Dec. 29, 1833. 1 

Lucian E. Hikcox m. Elizabeth L. Sher- 
man of Oxford, June 11, 1835. 

Lucius F. Hikcox m. Eliza Sherman, 
Mch. 3, 1S37. 

Maria Hickox m. Treat Peck, 1846. 

Mary Hickox m. Daniel Buck, 1829. 

Nathaniel Hickox, s. of Jared, m. Sally 

Gregory, d. of Stephen of Kent, Oct. 

20, 1800. 

I. Mercy, b. Apr. 8, 1801. 

Polly Hickox m. Avery Hotchkiss, 1810. 

Preserved Hikcox, s. of Capt. Abraham, 
m. Rachel l^rown, d. of Capt. Heze- 
kiah, dec'd, Oct. 3, 17S6. 

1. Samuel, b. Mch. S, 17S7. 

2. Salla Mariah, b. May 17, 1789. 

[Serg. Samuel Hikcox m. Hanna . 

His inventory was taken Feb. 28, 
I ('194-5, at which date the ages of his 
children were, as follows: 

Samuel, 26. Hannah, 24; m. John Judd, 1696. 
— ^VilUam, 22. Thomas, 20. Joseph, 17. Alary, 
14; m. John Bronson. EHzabeth, 12; m. J. 
Norton of Farmington. Stephen, n. Benja- 
min, 9. :Mercy, 6. Ebenezer, 2.] 

Samuel Hikcox, s. of Serg. Samuel, m. 
Elizabeth Plumb [b. 1669], d. of John 
of Alilford, Apr. 16, 1690. He d. June 

3. 1713; she, Oct. 17, 1749. 

1. A dau., b. and d. May, i6gi. 

2. Ebenezer, b. Oct. 6, 1692. 

3. Samuel, b. Nov. 3, 1694; d. July 7, 1713. 

4. John, b. Nov. 18 [bap. in Milford, Dec. 20], 

1696. 

5. Hanna, b. Apr. 21 [bap. in Milford], 1699]. 

6. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 6 [bap. in Milford, June 14), 

1702; [m. Samuel Smith.] 

7. A son, b. and d. Mch. 3, 1704. 

8. Gideon, b. Sept. 6, 1705. 

9. Sarah, b. Dec. 6, 1707 [in. J. Piatt of Norwalk]. 
10. Silans, b. Sept. 19, 1713 [ni. Abr. Bennett, 

1737]- 

Capt. Samuel Hikcox, s. of William, m. 
Mary Hopkins, d. of John, Mch. 8, 
1721. He d. May 13, 1765; she, Aug. 
19, 1768. 

1. Mary, b. Oct. 30, 1721; m. R. Seymour. 

2. Mehitable, b. Nov. 22, 1723; m. S. Seymour. 

3. William, b. Jan. 14, 1725-6. 

4. Abraham, b. Jan. 11, 1727-8. 



Hikcox. Hikcox. 

5. John, b. July 25, 1730. 

6. Samuel, b. Sept. 8, 1736 (1733?). 

7. Dorcas, b. July 11, 1736; m. John Welton. 

Capt. Samuel Hickcox [and Deac], s. of 
Deac. Thomas, m. Elizabeth Welton, 
d. of George, Nov. 26, 1741. 

1. Jonas, b. Auk. 20, 1742. 

2. Mary, b. Jan. 12; d. Jan. 24, 1744-5. 

3. Mary, b. Sejit. 16, 1746; d. Aug. 26, 1749. 

4. Samuel, b. June 9, 1749. 

5. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 29, 1752; m. Th. Bronson. 
<). Hannah, b. May 24, 1754; m. John Nettleton. 

7. Eh, b. June 17, 1757 [m. Mary Buckini;ham], 

and d. Apr. 30, 1788. 

8. Josiah. b. Sept. 9, 1760 [m. Phebe Stoddard, d. 

of John of W'oodburv, Dec. 2, 1770, and d 
i7Sf-i|. 

Samuel Hikcox, s. of Gideon, m. Ellinor 
Warner, d. of Obadiah, June 4, 1761. 

1. Osee, b. Aug. 14, 1762. 

2. Enos, b. Apr. 22, 1764. 

3. A dau., b. Nov. 24, 1765. 

4. A son, b. Sept. 3, 1767. 

Eleanor d. Nov. 14, 1767, and Samuel 
m. Charity Dixon, Nov. 10, 1768. 

5. Silva, b. Jan. 20, 1770. 

6. Charity, b. July 15, 1773. 

7. Samuel Johnson, b. Oct. 31, 1775. 

8. Saphya, b. July 26, 177S. 

Samuel Hikcox, 3d [s. of Samuel of 
Thomas], m. Sarah Scovill, Dec. 5, 
1 771. and d. Sept. 9, 1778. Sarah d. 
Oct. I, 1776. 

Samuel J. Hikcox, s. of Samuel [of Gid- 
eon], m. Laura Culver, d. of Amos, 
Oct. 15, iSoo. 

1. Selden, b. Sept. 22, 1801; d. Oct. 1803. 

2. Sally, b. Aug. 3, 1804; m. E. M. Payne. 

3. Samuel Hopkins, b. Apr. 16, 1810. 

Sarah M. Hickcock m. J. W. Smith, 
1S49. 

Sherman Hickcox [s. of Timothy], m. 
Sally Camp, Apr. 22, 1824. 

Deac. Thomas Hikcox, s. of Serg. Sam- 
uell, dec'd, m. Mary Brunson, d. of 
Serg. Isaac, Mch. 27, 1700. He dyed 
June 28, 1728; and Mary m. Deac. Sam. 
Bull [Nov. 23, 1748]. She d. July 4, 
1756. 

1. Thomas, b. Oct. 25, 1701. 

2. ]\Iary, b. May 28, 1704; d. Apr. ^jo, 1706. 

3. Mary, b. Mch. 9, 1706-7; m. J. Warner, 1728. 

4. Sarah, b. Jan. 2, 1709-10 [m. Dan. Benedict]. 

5. [Mercy] , m. Isaac Hopkins, 1732. 

6. Amos, b. May 19, 1715. 

7. Jonas, b. Oct 30, 1717. 

8. Samuel], b. Aug. 30, 1720. 

9. Susanna, b. Mch. 25, 1723; m. G. Nichols, 1741. 
10. James, b. June 26, 1726. ' 

[Deac] Thomas Hikcox, s. of Thomas 
(above), dec'd, m. [Miriam Richards, 
wid. of Samuel, Apr. 19, 1736. [He 
d. Dec. 28, 1787; she, Mch. 13, 17S0J. 

1. Thomas, b. Apr. 4, 1737. 

2. Sarah, b. Mch. 20, 1739; m. N. Woodward, 1757. 

3. Daniell, b. Dec. 16, 1742. 

4. James, b. Jan. 19, 1747-8; d. Aug. 25, 1749. 

5. James, b. May 8, 1755. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



ap65 



HiKCOX. HiGGINS. 

Thomas Hikcox, Jr., s. of [2d] Deac. 
Thomas, m. Lois Richards, d. of Thom- 
as, July 17, 1760. 

1. Sarah, b. May 12, 1762. 

Lois, d. May 11, 1764, and Thomas m. 
Thankful- Seymer, d. of Stephen, May 
12, 1765. 

2. Lois Richards, b. Mch. 29; d. Dec. ig, 1766. 

3. Thomas, b. Oct. 19, 1767. 

4. Lois Richards, b. Oct. 29, 1769. 

5. ]MarI<, b. May 23, 1773. 

6. Ire, b. Mch. 24, 1775. 

7. Isaac, b. July 5, 1778. 

Timothy Hikcox, s. of Capt. Abr., m. 
vSarah Nichols, d. of Richard, May 3, 
1781. She d. Jan. 24, 1S13; he, Dec. 8, 
i835.-^ 

1. Sarah, b. June 27, 1782. 

2. Eh'zabeth, b. Aug. 11, 1783. 

3. PoUa, b. Nov. 13, 1784. 

4. Abram, b. May 23, 1786. 

5. Huldah, b. Auk. 4, 1787; m. Jas. Chatfield. 

6. Leonard, b. Sept. 15, 178S. 

7. Laura, b. Oct. i, 1790; m. Anson lironson, 1S16. 

8. Palmira, b. Jan. i, 1792. 

u. Nancy, b. Feb. 23, 1793; d. May 4, 1801. 

10. Lydia, b. Dec. 17, 1794; m. L. A. Hickox. 

11. Cliloe, b. June 13, 1797; m. J. Talmage. 

12. Sherman, b. Sept. 29, 1798. 

13. Viana, b. June 30, 1800. 

14. Nancy, b. Feb. 8, 1802; m. P. Stoddard, 1827. 

15. WilUam, b. Sept. 12, 1803. 

Wiih'am Hikcox [s. of Serg. Samuel], 
'Jvt, attd- Rebeckah [Andrews, d. of Abra- 
ham, Sr.]. 

2. WilUam, b. Feb. 14, 1699; deyed Apr. 12, 1713. 

3. Samuel, b. May 26, 1702. 

-^ 4. Abraham, b. Apr. 5, 1704; deyed Mch. 16, 1713. 

5. John, b. May 8, 1706; deyed Apr. 26, 1713. 

6. Rebeckah, b. IVIch. 29, 1708; m. C. Thompson. 

7. Rachel, b. May 16, 1710; m. J. Prindle. 

8. Hannah, b. June 7, 1714; m. D. Scott. 

William d. Nov. 4, 1737, and was buried 
the 5th of Nov. 
William Hikcox, s. of Samuel [and 
Mary], m. Lydia Saymore, d. of Eben- 
ezer, dec'd, Apr. 4, 1745. 

1. William, b. Jan. 14, 1746. 

2. Consider, b, June 21, 1748. 

3. Abigail, b. July 28, 1751; m. Thomas Welton. 

4. Lidia, b. July 29, 1757. 

5. Rebeckah, b. Oct. 14, 1759. 

Lydia d. June 19, 1762, and AVilliam m. 
Abigail vScott, d. of Edmund, Jan. 12, 
1763. 

6. Cloe, b. Feb. 7, 1764. 

7. Hannah, b. Oct. 31, 1765; m. Eleazer Tompkins. 

8. Asahel, b. Nov. 22, 1767. 

William Hikcox, s. of Tim., m. Jerusha 
Bronson, d. of Horatio Gates, Oct. i, 
1830. 

1. Mary Emeline, b. Nov. 5, 1831. 

2. Margarett Ann, b. Sept. 17, 1834. 

3. Sarah Vienna, b. June 28, 1837; d. Dec. 1844. 

4. -Sarah Maria, b. June 13, 1844; d. Jan., 1845. 

Seth H. Higby of Port Bryon, N. Y., m. 

Maria Finch, Nov. 11, 183S. 
Emeline Higgins m. R. Tuttle, 1832. 

8* 



HicciNs. Hill. 

Eunice Higgins, her child:^ 

Leve Ke!^, b. Apr. 5, 1780. 

Luther Higgins, s. of Timothy of Wol- 
cott, m. [Mrs.] Susan Lambert [wid. of 
Jesse, and] d. of Thomas Judd, Mch. 
29, 1829. 

1. Mary, b. Jan. 4, 1830. 

2. Martha Augusta, b. Jan 4, 1832; d. Jan., 1838. 

3. Margaret Louisa, b. Oct 15, 1835; d. Dec, 1844. 

4. Timothy, b. Dec. 20, 1837. 

5. Henry Clark, b. Aug. 6, 1840. 

6. Stephen Judd, b. Oct. 15, 1843. 

7. Hannah Amanda, b. Nov. 24, 1846. 

Michael Higgins m. Esther Mulhall, 

July 13, 1851. 
Andrew Hills and vSylvia Peck, b. Feb. 

II. 1 82 1— both from Farmington— m. 

Feb. 23, 1S41. 

I. Cornelia, b. Mch. 30, 1845. 

Anna Hill m. Titus Darrow, 1780.^ 
Betty Hill m. Eben. Judd, 1782. 
Elizabeth Hill m. David Curtis, 1769. 
Eunice Hill m. Dan. Frisbie, 1794. 
Harvey Hill, s. of Obadiah, m. Sally 

McDonald, d. of James, dec'd, Apr. 23, 

1809. 

1. Lucius, b. Feb. 5, 1810. 

2. Susan Jennet, b. Feb. 3, 1812. 

3. Richard, b. Jan. 12, 1814. 

4. Augustus, b. Apr. 14, 1816. 

Jared and Eunice Hills: 

Lydia and Samuel, liap. July 6, 1796. ' 

Jerusha Hill m. Samuel Welton, 1769. 
Jonathan Hill's children: 

Lemuel, b. Apr. 27, 1750. 
Rosanna, b. Mch. 20, 1752. 

Obadiah and Lucy Hills;' 

Harvey, John Whittlesey, and Nancy, bap. July 
6, 1796. Harriet, bap. Alay 6, 1798. 

Polly Hill, m. Jesse Munson, 1799. 
Samuel Hills, s. of Elijah of New Haven, 

ni. Sibble Cook, d. of Charles, Oct. 17, 

1791. 

1. Harriet, b. June 11, 1792. 

2. Julia, b. May 19, 1795. 

3. Elijah JNI., b. Aug. 3, 1798. 

4. Polly, b. Sept. 12, 1800. 

5. Samuel C, b. Apr. 8, 1803. 

6. Caroline, b. July 30, 1806; d. Aug. 23, . 

Sybill Hills- 
Charles Nelson, bap. Jan. 13, i8ii.I 

Samuel Hill, s. of Jared, m- Polly Brock- 
ett, d. of Giles, Oct. 14, 1807. He d. 
Apr. 26, 1834, a 50.^ 

1. Henry Augustus, b. Jan. 19, 1809. 

2. Junius Fayette, b. July 21, 1811. 

3. Sarah Maria, b. Apr. 14, 1816; d. Jan. 1822. 

4. Eunice Hortensia, b. Nov. 8, 1818. 

Stanley Griswold Hill m. Vienna Eliza- 
beth Baldwin, Apr. 14, 1825. 
Suza M. Hill m. Tim. Williams, 1792. 

Betsey Beach, her dau., b. Oct. 4, 1791, 



lAp 



BISTORT OF WATERS URT. 



Hll, I.MAX. HlXE. 

William Hillman of Black River m. Re- 
becca Stevens, Nov. iS, iSio.f' 

Alexander Hine of Natigatuck m. Eliza 

A. Williams, June 24, 1849. 
Betsey Hine m. Isaac M. Allen, 1S35. 
Eli Hine, s. of David, m. Hannah Bron- 

-son, d. of Capt. Isaac, Oct. 30, 1792. 

1. Laban Bronson, b. Sept. 25, 1793. 

2. Alvin, b. .Sept 24, 1795. 

3. Josiah, b. Sept. 13, i'7q7. 

4. Enos, b. Maj' 5, I'Soo. " 

5. Elizabeth Susan .Maria, b. Aug. 28, 1802. 

Emma Hine m. Lewis Bates, 1849. 
Esther Hine m. Eben. Hickco.x, 17 14. 
Hezekiah Hine d. SejDt. 13, 1807; Eunice, 
his wife, Feb. i, 1813. * 

Hiram Hine of Middleburv m. Maria 
Adams, Oct. 8, 1835. 

-Isaac Hine m. Eunice Wilmot of Amitv, 
Nov. 6, 1768. He d. Dec. 3, 1807, a.' 
64; she, Dec. 29, 1806, a, 60. ^ 

1. Cloe, b. Dec. 8, 1769. 

2. Eunice, b. Apr. 10, '1771. 

3. Isaac Willard, b. July 24, 1774. 

4. Milliscent, b. May o, 1777. 

Isaac Hine, s. of Newton, m. Anna An- 
drews of Woodbridge (before 1S17). 

Isaac Hine, s. of Benjamin of Middle- 
bury, m. Polly Rowley of Winsted 
1836. 

1. James K., b. Nov. 27, 1837. 

2. Mary Jane, b. July 26, 1840. 

(A deaf and dumb family exxept Mary ) 

S. B. M. 

John Hine: 

Charles I'.dward, bap. July 6, 1823.9 

Joseph Hine of Hudson, O., m. Eliza- 
beth Welton, July 21, 1836. 

Lewis Hine of Cairo, Green Co., N. Y., 
m. Nancy (Sarah?) Hull, d. of Dr. Nim' 
rod, dec'd, Nov. 19, 1827. 

Lucius Hine m. Sarah Strong of Derby 

June 8, 1835. 

Lydia Hine m. Jonas Boughton, 1798. 
Maria Hine m. Reuben Adams, 1837. 
Mary Hine m. Th. Clark, 1765, and Benj. 
Upson, 1 7 So. 

Mehitable Hine m. Thomas Porter, 1758. 

Milo Hine m. Mary C. Smith, Jan. i, 
1 849. 

Newton Hine and Lois [Prichard]: 

Elizabeth S. and Newton, bap. Apr. 28, 1817.8 

Newton Hine, Jr., b. Apr. 2, 1811, s. of 
Newton, and Mehitable E. Bronson, b. 
Aug. 31, TS13, d. of Southmayd, m. 
June 3, 1S30. 

I. I. Southmayd, b. May i, 1833. 
g. William Henry, b. Oct. ig, 1840. 



•'^^- Hitchcock. 

Philander Hine, s. of Daniel of Walling- 
turd, m. Harriet C. Castle, d. of Samuel 
D. of Camden, N. Y., Oct. 24, 1836. 

I. Estella Cordelia, b. Feb. i8, 1840. 

Rebecca Hine m. John Cossett, 1799. 
Spencer Hine m. Sally Gunn in Salem 

Apr. 25, 1 82 1. 

Thaddeus Hine d. Nov., 1816.^ 

Amos Hinman, s. of Elijah of Southbury, 

m. Thankful Bronson, d. of Tames' 

May, 17S6. 

1. Ruthe Matilda, b. Nov. 26, 1786. 

2. Lecta Parmela, b. May 8, 1789. 

3. Orlando, b. .\pr. 18, 1792. 

4. Elijah Porter, b. Apr. 19, 1805. 

David Hinman m. Frances Reynolds— 
both of New Haven— Dec. 4, 1850. 

Joel Hinman, Esq., m. Mariah Scovil fd. 
of James], Oct. 9, 1825. 

[i. Caroline A., b. July 9, 1827; m. H. W. Good- 
win. 

2. William L., b. Mch. 12, 1833. 

3. Eunice S., b. Sept. 27, 1836. 

4. Mary C, b. Aug. 29, 1839.] 

Nelson Hinman m. Laury Judd, Jan. 24, 

1837- 
Aaron Hitchcock m. Sarah H. Scovill, 

Dec. 30, 1 83 1 [and d. Dec. 23, 1834]. 
Anne Hitchcock m. Thad. Bronson, 1794. 
Benjamin Hitchcock [b. Nov. 24, 1752, s. 

of Benj. and Rhoda (Cook) of Walling- 

ford, m. Eunice HotchkLss (prob. b. 

Jan. 8, 1755), d. of Daniel. She d. 1799; 

he, 1809. 

1. Anna, b. in Cheshire, Apr. 19, 1775; m. David 
Prichard, Jr. 

2. Loly, b. 1778; m. J. G. Tyrrel. 

3. Reuben; m. Plant. 

4. Jared; m. Loly Bunnel of Cheshire]. 

Children b. in Wat.: 

5. Manley, b. Dec. 23, 1783 [m. Chloe Adams]. 

6. Samuel, b. Mch. 31, 1787 |m. Amelia Osborn] . 

7. George, b. June 27, 1780 [lived at Watertown 
N. V.]. 

8. Benjamin Truman, b. Aug. lo, 1791. 

9. Eunice, b Feb. 19, 1793 [m. Henuin' Tyrrell]. 

Benjamin Truman Hitchcock, s. of Benj. , 
ni. Julia Frisbie, d. of Dan. [Feb. 27, 
181 5j. 

1. Eliza Finette, b. July 18, 1816; m. J. C. Beach. 

2. Edward Milton, b. July 28, 181S. 

3. Shelton Truman, b. Dec. 13, 1822. 

4. Juliett, b. July 4, 1828; d. June 10, 1831. 

4. Elmore William, b. May 13, 1833. 

5. George Benjamin, b. Sept. 16, 1838. 

Chester Hitchcock of New Haven m. 
Julia Ncttleton, June 24, 1835. 

Daniel Hitchcock, s. of Peter of Walling- 
ford, m. Mary Peck, d. of Ward, Dec. 

7. 1S33. 

1. Edwin Sherman, 1 
and lb. Apr. 17, 1834. 

2. Irving Lyman, ) d. May 12, 1839. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP67 



Hitchcock. Hoadley. 

3. Frederick, b. Apr. 18, 1837. 

4. ]\Iary Peck, b. Apr. 12, 1839. 

Mary d. Dec. 4, 1840, and Daniel m. 
Desiah B. Tolls of Bethlem, Apr. 11, 
1842. He d. July 31, 1S46. 

5. Harriet Eunice, b. Mch. 28, 1843. 

6. George Gaius, b. Aug. 6, 1844. 

Eunice Hitchcock, wid., d. Nov. 23, 1S09, 

a. 72.9 
Gaius Hitchcock of Wallingford ni. 

Betsey D. Bronson, Apr. 18, 1833. 

1. Aimer Bronson, bap. Aug. 30, 1835. 1 

2. James Newton, bap. July 2, 1837. 

Harriet Hitchcock ra. Lewis Russell, 

1S24. 
Huldah Hitchcock m. S. S. Deforest, 

1835- 
Jesse Hitchcock m. Celesta Russell — 

both of Prospect— Sept. 22, 1828. 
Mary Hitchcock m. V. Tuttle, 1824. 
Mary Hitchcock m. Stephen Sherwood, 

1^34- 
Polly Hitchcock m. D. Chatfield, 1S20. 
Susan Hitchcock m. L. F. Lewis, 1837. 
Susan Hitchcock m. H. P. Welton, 1823. 
Alvy Hoadley (s. of Asa?) m. Aurelia 

Phelps, Dec. 4, 1821. 
Amy Hoadley m. E. M. Stevens, 1S24. 
Andrew Hoadley m. Sarah Lewis, June 

14, 1770. 
Artemus Hoadley, s. of Asa, ni. Alma 

Frisbie, d. of Daniel, Nov. 16, 1S17, and 

d. Sept. iS, 1S30. 

1. Esther Elvira, b. Feb. 21, 1818; m. H. Frost. 

2. Daniel Frisbie, b. Sept. 13, 1819. 

3. Eunice Almira, b. Jan. 4, 1822. 

Asa Hoadley, s. of Nathaniel, m. Esther 
Tyler, d. of Abraham, Apr. 7, 1785. 
He d. Feb. 6, 1834, a. 71; she, May i, 
1837, a. 7G.2 

1. Clarinda, b. Jan. 28, 1786. 

2. Mary, b. Sept. 7, 17S8. 

3. Artemas, b. Mch. 24, 1791. 

4. Abram, b Jan. 13. 1704. 

5. Julia, b. Feb. 17, "1797'; m. Amos Atwater? 

6. Alvah. b. Feb. 19, 1800. 

Augusta Hoadley m. Isaac Coe, 1841. 

Benjamin Hoadley, s. of Jude, and Esther 
Merwin, b. Apr. 19, 1777, d. of Joseph 
of Woodbridge, m. Jan. 12, 179C. 

1. Lawson ?ililes, b. Oct. 20, 1796. 

2. Elvira, b. Sept. 24, 1798. 

3. Sabrina, b. Oct. 9, 1800. 

Eunice d. at Winchester, Apr. 27, 1S09, 
and Benjamin m. Sally Judd, Aug. 19, 
1810. 

4. Abigail, b. Apr. 28, 1814. 



Hoadley. Hoadley. 

Calvin Hoadley [b. Jan. 7, 1S05], s. of 

William of Salem, m. Betsey Pierce of 

Southington, Sept. 25, 1828. 
[Culpepper Hoadley m. Molly Lewis, d. 

of Samuel, Esq., Feb. 5, 1786.'' 

1. Roxana, b. July 15, 1787; m. Richard Ward. 

2. Samuel, b. June 14, 1790; d. unm. 

3. Leonard, b. July 20, 1792; m. Betsey Dunham. 

4. Larmon, b. Oct. 12, 1795; d. 1826 unm. 

5. Alvin, b. Apr. 24, 1798; m. Clara Vose.] 

David Hoadley [s. of Elemuel, m. Jane 
Hull, d. of Ezra, who d. 1799, leaving 
adau., Jane. He m. Rachel Beecher, 
d. of Jonathan, and d. 1840]: 

Jane, David, and Mary Ann, bap. Aug. i5, 1812.I 

*Eben Hoadley of vSalem m. Sarah Brooks 
of Bethany [Sunday], May 28, 1843. 

Ebenezer Hoadley, s. of William [3d], m. 
Sarah Lewis, d. of John, Jan. 6, 1763. 
He d. Sept. 23, 1814; she, June 22, 
1809.5 

1. Philo, b. Oct. 12, 1763. 

2. Chester, b. Sept. 23, 1771 [m. Betsey Hine]. 

Elemuel Hoadley, s. of William [3d], m. 
Urane Mallory, d. of Peter of Strat., 
Jan. 5, 1767. 

1. MoUe, b. Nov. i, 1767; m. Asahel ( )sborn. 

2. Calvin, b. Jan. 2, 1769. ^ 

3. David, b. Apr. 29, 1774. 

4. Samuel, b. Nov. 25, 1776. 

5. Lemuel, b. Apr. 20, 1779. 

6. Luther, b. Mch. 30, 1781. 

7. Sarah, b. Sept. 22, 1786. 

8. Urania, b. May 5, 178S. 

u. Marshall, b. May 3, 1791; d. Apr. 20, 1796. 

Erastus W. Hoadley m. Abigail Porter, 

Oct. 13, 1S23. 
George Hoadley of Naugatuck m. Fanny 

Twitchel of O.Kford, May 16, 1841. 

Hannah Hoadley m. John Beach, 1772, 

and Jesse Johnson, 17S0. 
Harriet Hoadley m. G. S. Johnson, 1S34. 
Jude Hoadley and Naomi: 

Benjamin, b. Apr. 25, 1771. 
[Asa, b. 1772.] 

Jude d. May 7, iSii, a. 6S y. 2 m. 17 d. ; 
Naomi d. at Winchester, Aug. 11, 1S15, 
a. 65. 
Laura A. Hoadley m. J. W. Allen, 1S47. 

Lewis M. Hoadley [s. of Chester] m. 
Emily Horton, Dec. 5, 1821. 

Marshall Hoadley [b. iSoi, s. of Will- 
iam and Nancy] m. Nancy Judd [d. of 
Harve\'] in Salem, Jan. iS, 1821. 

Mary Hoadley m. Lyman Johnson, 1780. 

Mary Hoadley m. John Coe, 1S37. 

Nathaniel Hoadley [s. of Nathaniel ?] m. 
Eunice Tyler, May 11, 17S0. 



* Their golden wedding was celebrated at the First Church, Sunday, May 28, 1893, at the evening service. 



68 Ap 



HIS TOR Y OF WA TERB UR Y. 



HoADi.KV. Holmes. 

1. A dau., b. and d. Au.tr. 14, 1781. 

2. Riizett:i, b. Sept. 27, 1783. 

Philo Hoadley m. Esther Hine, d. of 
Hezekiah, Apr. 10, 1783.'' 

Sarah Hoadley ra. Leon. Spencer, 1821. 

Sarah Hoadley, wid., d. June 23, 1827.^ 

Sarah A. Hoadley m. J. Thornton, 1S3S. 

[William Hoadley (3d), b. about 1707, s. 
of Wm. of Branford, m. vSarah, d. of 
Eben. Frisbie, and d. before 17S5. 

Sarah; m. Israel Calkins, 1752. 
Eunice; m. Josiah Ternll, 1756. 
William. Elemuel. Ebenezer, b. 1738. 
Ithiel.J Jude, b. 1743. 

William Hoadley s. of "William, m. Es- 
ther Porter, d. of Joshua, dec'd, (U't. 
27, 1761. 

1. Ammi, b. June 11, 1762. 

2. Culpepper, b. Sept. 10. 1764. 

[William; m. Nancy Hitchcock. Lois. Esther; 
111. Lyman Tyler. Ethel; 111. Olive Johnson.] 

William P. Hoadley of Plymouth m. 

Sarah Ann Wclton, Oct. 16, 1831. 
Lucy Hodge m. John Anderson, 1783.'' 
Abraham and Abigail Hodges: 

3. Abi;.,'ail, b. Apr. 13, 1731. 

Hannah Hodges m. H. P. Anderson, 

1825. 
James Hodson, s. of John, and Rosetta 
Smith from Middlebury, b. Aug., 1S23, 
m. Nov. 8, 1S46. 

I. John James Franklin, b. June 26, 1S47. 

John Hodson m. Jane Binyon in Birming- 
ham, Eng. 

I. Sarah, b. in Birm., May 17, 1822; m. Wm. Sand- 
land. 
James, b. in Birm., Feb. 24, 1824. 
Jane, b. in Birm., Dec. 10. 1826. 
Ann, b. in Birm., Apr. 8, 1828. 
John, b. July 3, 1830. 
Esther, b. Aug. 13, 1832. 
William, b. Dec. 27, 1837. 

Lorinda Holcomb m. H. Howe, 1S35. 

Mary Holcomb m. L. W. Cutler, 1S31. 

Joseph J. Hollister of Farmington m. 
Cleora Wooster, Aug. 13, 1S42. 

Andrew B. Holmes of Cornwall m. Mrs. 
Xancy Mcrriman, Nov. 30, 1S43. 

Frederick G. Holmes [s. of Reuben], m. 
l<:sther Nichols, Dec. 3, 1849. 

Israel Holmes, s. of Reuben of Green- 
wich, m. Sally Judd, d. of Capt.'Sam., 
Sept. 9, 1793- » 

1. Samuel Judd, b. Oct. 28, 1794. 

2. Sally Hannah, b. Apr. 27, 1796; d. Sept. 9, 1815. 

3. Reuben, b. Feb. 11, 1798. 

4. Ruth Wood, b. Apr. 26, 1799; m. S. G. Humiston 

and Preserve Carter, 1828. 

5. Israel, b. Dec. rg, 1800. 

6. Timon Miles, b. j\Ich. 20, 1802. 

Israel d. at Demirara, May 11, 1802, a. 
33; Sarah, d. Mch. 28, 1821. 



Hoi.MKs. Homer. 

Israel Holmes, s. of Israel dec'd, m. Ar- 

delia C. Hayden, d. of Daniel, June 2, 

1825. 

1. Hannah Ardelia, b. Mch. 23, 1826. 

2. Olive Margarett, b. Apr. 27, 1828. 

3. Eliza Jennet, b. Sept. 26, 1830. 

4. Charles Ed. Latimer, b. May 15, 1832. 
s. Hannah Margaret, b. May 20, 1838; d. 1844. 

6. Israel, b. May i, 1841; d. Oct., 1843. 

7. Reuben, b. Jan. 14, d. Sept. 10, 1843. 

8. Margarett, b. Sept. 20, 1844. 
Hannah Ardelia and Olive Margaret perished in 

a burning house, Feb. 25, 1833 (between 2 and 
3 o'c. A. M.), the house formerly of Capt. Sam. 
Judd. The first in her 7th year, the second in 
her 5th year; and with them was consumed 
John Nelson Tuttle, aged 31 years, who was 
lost in attempting to rescue these two children 
from the flames. (The funeral was attended 
by Rev. .Mr. Barlow. i) 

These will certify that Mr. Israel 
Holmes 2d, of Waterbury, Con., and 
]\Iiss Cornelia Coe of Detroit ]\Iich., 
were united in the bonds of matrnnony 
in the City of Detroit on the 22d of 
May, 1848, in the presence of the wit- 
nesses herein named, and agreeably to 
the laws of the State of Michigan, and 
the usages of the Presbyterian Church. 
Geo. Duffield, 
Pastor of ist Pres. Church of Detroit. 

vS. S. B.4RNARD, ) Txr., 

X -c -u r Witnesses. 

A. L. BiSSELL, \ 

Miles Holmes, s. of Israel, m. Eliza Jen- 
net [Bradle3'of Cheshire]. Shed. Sept. 
26, 1S30. 

T. James .M., b. Sept. 16, 1820. 

Lieut. Reuben Holmes, s. of Israel, m. 
Elizabeth M. Clark, d. of Elias, Nov. 
29 1826. Fie d. at Jefferson Barracks, 
Nov. 4, 1833, and she m. Leonard 
Warner. 

I. Frederick Onion, b. Sept. 6, 1827. 

Samuel J. Holmes, s. of Israel, m. Lucina j 
Todd, b. Mch. 7, 1796, d. of Hezekiah 
of Cheshire, May 2, 1822. 

1. Israel, b. Aug. 10, 1823. 

2. Samuel, b. Nov. 30, 1824. 

3. William Buskirk, b. in .Southington, Dec. 16, 

1826; d. May 2, i828._ 

4. Sarah, b. July 6, 1829, in Southington. 

5. William B., b. July 25, 1831, in Southington. 

6. Hannah Ardelia, b. Nov. 8, 1834; d. 1835. 

Mercy Holt m. Timothy Upson, 1833. 
Philemon Holt, b. Oct., 1781, s. of Eben. 

of East Haven (or Harwinton), m. Aug. 

17, 1806, Abby Barnes, b. Feb. 15, 1780, 

d. of Ambrose from Cheshire. 

'.. Sylvester, b. Jan. 20, 1807. 

2. ^Iarv Verona, b. Jan. 29, 1809; m. L. Sperry. 

3. Ulissa, b. Aug. 8, i8ii;'d. May 29, 1830. 

4. Saloma, b. Sept. 17, 1814; m. F. Johnson. 

5. Thcodosia, b. Oct. 8, 1817; m. C. Scott. 

6. Isaac, b. Jan. 14, 1820. 

7. Adeline, b. Sept. 20, 1823; m. H. Smith. 

Thomas Homer, b. July, 1804, and Cath 
arine Benton, b. May, 1S02, m. 1832. 

I. Catharine Benton, b. in Eng., Mch. 5, 1833. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



ap69 



Hopkins. Hopkins. 

Asa Hopkins, eldest s. of Joseph, Esq., 
m. Rebecca Knowles Payne, third d, of 
Benj,, Esq., and Rebecca, dec'd, Dec. 
I, 1784. 

1. Catharine Payne, b, Oct. 24, 1785. 

2. Amelia, b. June 24, 1787. 

3. Maria, b. Oct, 16, 1700. 

Rebecca d. Saturday, Sept. 17, 1791, a. 
29, and Asa m. Abigail Burnham, d. of 
the late Peter and Hannah, dec'd, of 
Weathersfield, Oct, 16, 1793 [and d. 
Dec. 4, 1S05]. 

4. Henry, b. Sept, 3, 1794. 

Consider Hopkins was maryed to Eliza- 
beth Grayham, Relict of Gorg of Hart- 
ford, Nov. 4, 1 713 [and d. in Hartford, 
1726. 

1. John, b. Sept, 5, 1714, 

2. Elizabeth, b, Jan. 28, 1715-16. 

3. Asa, b, Aug. 8, 1719. 

4. Consider, b, June 9, 1723. 

5. Elias, I1. July 5, 1726,] 

David Hopkins, s. of John, m, Mary 
Thompson, d. of Jon,, dec'd, of West 
Haven, July 4, 1791. He d. Apr. 21, 
1814; she, Aug., 1829,* 

[i, John, b. July 13, 1792; in. Abiah Woodruff, d. 
of Jonah, 1S15, and had Samuel, b. 1816, Ed- 
ward, b. 1817, Henry, b, 1819, Emily JNI., b. 
1822, David T., b. 1825, George, b. 1826 (Yale), 
Amelia, b. 1828, Willard, b. 1830, John, b. 1833. 

2. Polly, b, Nov, 13, 1794; m, W. H. Hine. 

3. David, b. Apr, 7, 1797; m. Clarissa Adams, d. of 

Andrew, and had Charles, Enos, Andrew, 
Dwight, and Jane. 

4. Mabel, b. Sept. 16, 1799; m, Alfred Stevens, 

5. Laura, b. Mch. 2, 1802; d. May 22, 1811. 

6. Truman, b. Jan. 23, 1S05. 

7. Edwin, b. Dec. 20, 180S.] 

[Enos Hopkins, b. Mch. 28, 1821, s. of 
David, m. Clarissa D. Morris at Wood- 
bury, June 15, 1841. 

I. Henry B., b. Oct. 31, 1S42.] 

Harriet Hopkins m. Rev. Holland Weeks, 
1799. 

Isaac Hopkins [b. Nov. 25, 170S], s. of 
Eben. of Hartford, m. Mercy Hikcox, 
d. of Thomas, Sept. 21, 1732. She d. 
May 27, 1790; he, Jan, 13, 1S05, a. 96. 

1. Obedience, b. Sept, i, 1733: d, Dec, i, 1736. 

2. Symeon, b. Aug. 30, 1735; d. Dec. 25, 1736. 

3. Eede, b. Nov, 21, 1737; m. Samuel Judd. 

4. Simeon, b. Nov. 19, 1740. 

5. Irene, b. Dec. 27, 1742-3; m. John Selkrig, and 

Nathaniel Sutliff, 

6. Ruth, b. Dec, 26, 1745; d. Sept. 22, 1752. 

7. Osee, b, June 18, 1748; d, Aug. 26, 1749. 

8. Mitte, b. Dec. 14, 1750 [d. Nov. 4, 1806]. 

9. Mary, b. Dec. 4, 1753. 

10. Welthe, b. June 2, 1756; m. Charles Upson and 
Thomas Welton. 

II. Ruth, b. Dec. 10, 1759; m. Ziba Norton. 

Mary [Butler], mother of Isaac, d. May 
17, 1744. 

Jesse Hopkins, s. of Joseph, Esq., m. 
Betsev Goodwin, d. of Nathl. of Hart- 



la, u. ocpL. zo, 1752; a, reo. i 
I m. Rev, Mr. Camp. 

Vb. Nov. 25, 1755. 
) m. Eli Curtiss, 1783, 



Hopkins. Hopkins. 

ford, dec'd, Dec. 3, 1794, who d. Feb. 
14, 1799. 

1. Betsey, b. Dec. 8, 1795. 

2, Sally Goodwin, b. Sept. 13, 1798. 

John Hopkis 

first child being a daughter, b. Dec. 22, 16S4; 
d, Jan. 4, 16S4, 

2. John, b. Mch. 29, 1686; d. at Hartford, Dec, 5, 

T709. 

3. Consider, b. Nov. 10, 16S7. 

4. Stephen, b, Nov. 19, 1689. 

5. Timothy, b. Nov. 16, 1691. 

6. Samuell, b, Dec, 27, 1693. 

7. Mary, b. Jan. 27, 1696-7; m. Sam. Hikcox.-i- ' 

8. I Twins, b. Apr, 23, 1699. One, Hannah [bap. 

9. j at Woodbury, iVIay 23, 1703] m. Dan, Por- 

ter; the other d. June 13, 1699. 
ID. Dorkas, b. Feb. 12, 1705-6; m. James Porter, 

Hannah, wife of John, d. May 3, 1730. 
John H(^pkins the first d. Nov. 4, 1732 
[leaving a widow, Sarah]. 
John Hopkins, s. of Stephen, m. Sarah 
Johnson, d. of Benajah of Derby, Dec. 
13. 1749- 

1. Sarah, b, ( )ct, i, 1750 [m. Amos Culver, 1776]. 

2. Susanna, b. Sept. 26, 1752; d, Feb. 18, 1776. 

3. Mabel, ," 

and 

4. Mary, 

5. Lois, b. Nov. 13, 1757 [m. John Hotchkiss]. 

6. David, b. Aug, 24, 1762. 

vSarah d. May 31, 1766, and John m. 
Patience Frost, d, of vSamuel, Jan. 14, 
1767. He d. May 12, and she, Julv 23, 
1802. 

7. Rhoda, b. Sept. 29, 1767; m. F. Hotchkiss. 

8. Patience, b. July 22, 1769; d. Feb, 8, 1770. 

9. John, b. Oct. 29, 1770; d. Jan. g, 1777. 

10, Patience, b. Dec, 10, 1774, 

11, Susanna, b. May 19; and d, Oct, 2, 1780. 

12, John, b. F"eb, 19, 1782. 

Joseph Hopkins (Esq.), s. of vStephen, m. 
Hepsibah Clark, d. of Thomas, Nov. 
28, 1754. She d. July 29, 1800; he, Mch. 

27, 1801. 

1. Livia, b. Aug. 27, 1755; ni. Benoni Upson. 

2. Asa, b. Sept, i, 1757. 

3. Joseph, b, Jan, 9, 1760, 

4. Daniel, b. Apr. 8, 1762, 

5. Esther, b. Feb. 25, 1764; m. Mark Bronson. 

6. Jesse, b. May 20, 1766. 

7. Hezsibah, b. Mch. 14, 1768: m, Ethel Bronson, 

8. Hannah, b. May 30, 1770 [m. Stiles Thompson], 

9. Sally, b. Nov. 27, 1772. 

Joseph Hopkins, Jr., s, of Jos., Esq., was 
m, to Ruth Gilbert, d. of Abijah, Esq., 
of Salem, N. Y., by Rev, Solomon Madi- 
son, Jan. 22, 1784. 

1. Anna, b. Mch. 9, 1786. 

2. Gilbert, b. Dec. 3, 1787. 

3. Becca, b. Mch. 21, 1790, 

4. Sophia, b, Dec. 26, 1791. 

5. Jesse, b. Feb, 23, 1794. 

6. Joseph, b. Oct. 26, 1796. 

7. Eliza, b, Dec. 2, 179S. 

Rhoda Hopkins m. Micah Blakeslee, 
1789,-' 

[Samuel Hopkins, s, of John, m. June 

28, 1727, Esther Edwards, d. of Rev. 



70 Ap 



BISTORT OF WATERBUB7. 



Hoi'KiNS. Hopkins. 

Timothy of East Windsor, and d. at 
West Springfield, Oct. 6, 1755, in the 
52d yr. of his age, and 36th of his min- 
istry. 

1. Timothy, b. June, 1728; d. 1807. 

2. Samuel, b. Oct. 31, 1729 (Rev. S. of Iladley, 

1755-1821). 

3. Hannah, b. Jan., 1731; m. J. Worthinjiton. 

4. Esther, 1>. 1733; d. 1740.] 

Samuel Hopkins, s. of Stephen, m. Molly 
Miles, d. of David of Wallingford, 
dec'd, June 27, 1771. 

I. Samuel Miles, b. May 9, 1772. 

Samuel Hopkins m. Harriet C. Ford— 

Ijoth of Salem — Apr. 5, 1S37. 
Sarah Hopkins, her child: 

Isabela Warner, b. Jan. 2, 1786. 

Simeon Hopkins, s. of Isaac, m. Lois 
Richards, d. of Obad., Nov. 15, 1764. 

I. Hannah, b. Aug. 5, 1765. 
•2. Sarah, b. June 2, 1767. 

3. Electe, b. July 8, 1770. 

4. Isaac, b. Jan. 11, 1773. 

5. Lois, b. July 21, 1775. 

6. Richards Obadiah, b. Jan. 11, 177S. 

7. Polly, b. Sept. 19, 1779. 

8. Harvey, b. June o, 1782. 

[Stephen Hopkins, s. of Stephen of Hart- 
ford, m. Sarah, d. oi Lieut. Th. Judd, 
Nov. 17, 1686. She d. May 11, 1693. 
Her death is recorded in Hart., also in 
Wat., with her father's family.] 

Stephen Hopkins, s. of John, marid Su- 
sannah Peck, d. of John of Wal., Aug. 
20, 171S. 

1. John, b. July 28, 1719. 

2. Stephen, b. June 12, 1721. 

3. Anna, b. Sept. 25, 1723; m. Thomas Bronson, 

and Phineas Royce. 

4. Susanna, b. Nov. 10, 1725; d. Sept. 26, 1748. 

5. Mary, b. June 4, 1728; d. June 7, 1735. 

6. Joseph, b. June 6, 1730. 

7. Jesse, b. Feb. 12, 1733; d. Dec. 3, 1754 

8. Mary, b. Nov. 26, 1735; d. Sept. 27, 1748. 

9. Lois, b. June 22, 1738 [m. Isaac Johnson, s. of 

Benajah, and d. Oct. 16, 1814.] 
10. David, b. Oct. 14, 1741; d. Sept. 23, 1748. 

Susanna d. Dec. last, 1755, and Stephen 
m. Abial Webster, Rellick of John of 
Farming-ton, :\lay 25, 1756. He d. Jan. 
4, 1769. 
Stephen Hopkins, s. of Eben., dec'd, of 
Hart., m. Jemima Brounson, d. of John, 
Feb. 26, 1729-30. 

1. Noah, b. Jan. 24, 1 730-1. 

2. Roswell, b. May 18, 17^3. 
^ Micah, b. Mch. 9, 1734. 

Stephen Hopkins, Jr., s. of Stephen, m. 
Patience Brounson, d. of Isaac (2d), 
Oct. II, 1744. 

I. Anna, b. Oct. i, 1745. 

Patience d. June 3, i746,:and Stephen 
m. Dorothy Talmage, d. of James of 
New Haven, Dec. 16, 1747. 

I. Samuel, b. Nov. 21, 1748. 



Hopkins. 



HOTCHKISS. 



2. Lemuel, b. June 19, 1750. 

3. Stephen, b. Apr. 22, 1754 [d. 1782, with small- 

pox]. 

4. Hannah, b. Sept. 23, 1737. 

5. Esther, b. Aug. 29; d. Nov. 4, and the mother 

Oct. 22, 1761. 

Timothy Hopkins, s. of John, m. Mary 
Judd, d. of Deac. Th., June 25, 1719, 
and d. Feb. 5, 1748-9. [She d. Dec. 5, 
1744, and a son of three weeks, four 
days later.] 

T. Samuell, b. Sept. 17, 1721 [d. at Newport, 1803]. 

2. Timothy, b. Sept. 8, 1723. 

3. Huldah, b. Dec. 22, 1725; m. Abijah Richards. 
,). Hannah, b. Apr. 11, 1728; m. Th. Upson. 

5. Sarah, b. May 25, 1730; m. Tim. Clark. 

6. James, b. June 26, 1732; d. July 14, 1754 [at New 

Haven; a student at Yale]. 

7. Daniel, b. Oct. 16, 1734 [d. at Salem, Mass., Dec. 

14, 1814, having preached there nearly fifty 
years] . 

8. Mary, b. June 27, 1737; m. John Cossett. 

0. Mark, b. Sept. 18, 1739 fd.at Great Barrington]. 

Timothy Hopkins, Jr., s. of Timothy, m. 
Jemima Sowrill (or Towrill), d. of Ab- 
raham of Simsbury, Jan. 14, 1 741-2. 

1. Ehud, b. Feb. i, 1742-3. 

2. lchal>od, b. Dec. 7, 1744. 
I Dorcas, b. May 26, 1747. 
Timothy, b. Nov. 25. 1750. 

Esther, b. Feb. 8, 1752; m. David Porter. 
James, b. Aug. 14, 1754. 

Jemima, b. May 17, 1757; m. Stephen Sibley. 
Sarah, b. June 5, 1760; m. Sylvanus Adams. 
Mary, b. 1762. Benjamin. 

Timothy removed to Great Barrington, 
Mass., before 1747, was chosen deacon, 
1753, and d. about 1773.] 

Truman Hopkins m. Julia Martin, Aug. 

26, 1824. 
Abner Hopen's inf., d. Jan. 16, 1810.^ 

Albon Hoppen, s. of Benj., m. Charlotte 
Terril, d. of Enoch, Oct. 13, 1808. 

1. Andrew H., b. Oct. 26, 1811. 

2. Esther, b. Jan. 3, 1813. 

3. Reuben, b. July 18, 1814. 

4. Sally, b. Nov. 24, 1819. 

Bethia Hopson m. W. M. Fowler, 1S42. 

Francis Horan m. Susan Nolan, June 13, 
1851. 

Emily Horton m. L. M. Hoadley, 1S21. 

Emily Horton m. Robert Coe, 1842. 

Harriet Horton m. A. H. Lewis, 1841. 

John Horton d. Feb. 4, 17S7 (wife, Su- 
sanna).* 

John Horton d. May 14, 1799; Mary, his 
w., 1 )ec. 20, 1804.-'^ 

Mary Horton m. S. A. Bunnell, 1823. 
Nancy Horton m. R. F. Welton, 1830. 
Clarissa Hosmer m. Leonard Piatt, 1826. 
Abraham Hotchkiss, s. of Capt. Gideon, 

m. Hannah Weed, d. of John, Dec. 28. 

1767, and d. Oct. 29, 1806. 



FAMILY BE00RD8. 



Ap71 



HOTCHKISS. 



HOTCHKTSS. 



1. John, b. Nov. i6, 1768. 

2. Ezra, b. Mch. 2, 1772. 

3. Lois, b. June 2, 1773; m. Jos. Payne, 1795. 

4. Hannah, b. July 5, 1775 [m. Amos 'linker]. 

5. Joel, b. Nov. 29, 1781. 

6. Benjamin, b. June 15, 1786. 

Abraham Hotchkiss d. Nov. 24, 1S02; 
had wife Rosetta from Bethany.'' 

Amos Hotchkiss, s. of Capt. Gideon, m. 
Abigail vScott, d. of Gershom, Dec. 24, 
1772". 

1. Woodward, b. Oct. 19, 1773. 

2. Sabria, b. July ig, 1777. 

3. Avera, b. Apr. 5, 1779. 

4. Molly, b. Feb. 9, 1783. 

5. Orel, b. Apr. 11, 1785; d. Apr. 5, 1789. 

6. Amos Harlow, b. Feb. 18, 1788. 

7. Orren, b. Apr, i, 1792. 

8. Al^igail Orel, b. Sept. 10, 1790; d. 1804. 

Amos Harlow Hotchkiss and Lucretia 
A.:'' 

Marilla, bap. 1812; m. I. G. Smith. 
Alathea, bap. Au.tj. 5, 1821; m. J. Beardsley. 
Sylvia, bap. Nov. 17, 1822. 

Amos H. Hotchkiss m. Sarah M. vScott— 
both of Salem — [Aug. 29, 1S37]. 

Asahel Hotchkiss, s. of Deac. Gideon, 
m. Sarah Williams, Mch. 22, 17S1. 

1. Sally, b. Oct. 27, 1781. 

2. Curtiss, b. May 4, 1783. 

3. Dyer, b. June 24, 1785. 

4. Esther, b. May 21, 1788. 

Sarah d. Mch. 28, 1794, and Asahel m. 
Phebe Merriman of Cheshire, June 7, 
1794- 

5. Tempy, b. Feb. 27, 1797. 

6. Asahel Augusta, b. June 30, 1799. 

7. Marcus, b. Sept. i, i8oi. 

8. Phebe Maria, b. Aug. 5, 1805. 

Avery Hotchkiss of Columbia m. Polly 
Hikcox, Oct. 22, iSio. 

Benjamin Hotchkiss, s. of Abr. , dec'd, m. 
Hannah Beecher of Cheshire, July 26, 
1807. 

[i. Horace, b. Sept. 29, 1809. 

2. Lyman, b. June 4, 1812. 

3. Harriet, b. Nov. ig, 1815. 

4. Emeline, b. Dec. 14, 1818. 

5. Rosannah, b. Jan. 10, 1820. 

6. Benjamin Gilbert, b. Aug. i, 1833]. 

Bronson Hotchkiss m. Abigail M. Orton 
of vSheffield, Mass., Dec. 15, 1825. 

Calvin Hotchkiss, s. of Joel, m. Asenath 
Sanford, d. of Jared of Cheshire, Dec. 
23, 1825. 

Charles Hotchkiss m. Electa Brace of 
Torrington, Jan. 3, 1833. 

Curtiss Hotchkiss:' 

Frances, bap. Apr. 30, 1801. 

Betsey J., bap. Dec. 29, 181 1. 

Susan, bap. Mch. 19, 1820; m. J. A. Pierpont. 

Alonzo, bap. Dec. 23, 1821. 

Thompson Clark, bap. Aug. 18, 1824. 

Elvira, m. Lucius Baldwin, 1835. 



Hotchkiss. Hotchkiss. 

David Hotchkiss, s. of Capt. Gideon, m. 

Abigail Douglas of Meriden, Nov. 21, 

1763. 

1. Asenath, b. July 11, 1764. 

2. Sarah, b. Mch. 20, 1766. 

3. Fradick, b. Mch. 6, 1768. 

4. Levinah, b. Jan. g, 1770. 

5. Amraphd, b. June 25, 1772. 

6. Cyrus, b. Apr. 15, 1774. 

Abigail d. Apr. 5, 1775, and July 5, Da- 
vid m. Peninah Todd. 

7. Charles Todd, b. June 24, 1776. 

8. Abigail, b. Apr. 25, 1778. 
Q. Gillard, b. Oct. 12, 1780. 

10. Peninah, b. Feb. 21, 1783. 

David M. Hotchkiss and Zerviah [d. of 
JMartin Stevens];' 

Emily Butler, bap. Apr. 30, 1821. 
Laura, bap. Oct. 6, 1822. 

David Hotchkiss and Julia Terrill, b. 
July 24, 1S05 — both from Bethany — m. 
Sept. 19, 1S23. 

1. Martha Augusta, b. Jan. 11, 1825; m. C. D. Up- 

son. 

2. Wales Oscar, b. Sept. 8, 1827. 

3. Mary Jane, b. Aug. 25, 1833. 

4. Henry Edgar, b. Apr. 5, 1835. 

5. David Franklin, b. Dec 5, 1840. 

David, d. Nov. 15, 1841, and Julia m. 
Robert Scott. 

Eben Hotchkiss, s. of Capt. Gideon, 
m. Mary Sanford, d. of Gideon of 
Cheshire, Feb. 15, 1781. 

1. Anna, b. Dec. 23, 1781; m. John Pricliard. 

2. Gideon Mills, b.' Nov. 11, 1784. 

Edgar Hotchkiss m. Mary Ann Cole of 
Cornwall. Feb. (Apr.-) 23, 1843. 

Eldad Hotchkiss:' 

Sherman, bap. Nov. 3, 1799. 
Eldad, bap. Apr. 3, 1803. 

Eldad Hotchkiss, 2d m. Nancy Atwater, 
Nov. 26, 1S23. 

Nancy Mariah, bap. Nov. 25, 1826.9 

Elijah Hotchkiss [b. Nov. 16, 1766], s. of 
Elijah of Derby, m. Polly Clark, d. of 
David of Milford, Apr. 19, 1795. 

1. Clark Beers, b. Mch. 17, 1796. 

2. Horace, b. July 11, 1799. 

3. Rebeckah, b. Mch. 18, 1805; m. C. D. Kingsbury. 

Polly d. Oct. 28, 1808, and Elijah m. 
Lucinda Warner, d. of James, June 7, 
1809. 

4. Henry, b. Mch. 12, d. Mch. 21, 1810. 

Elizabeth Hotchkiss m. Geo. Prichard, 
1744. 

Elizabeth Hotchkiss m. Amos Osborn, 

175S. 

Enoch Hotchkiss of New Haven m. 
Lois Wallcot, Oct. 28, 1783.'' 

Esther L. Hotchkiss m. Jesse Upson, 

1838. 



72 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



HorciiKiss. HoTCHKiss. 

Ezra Hotchkiss, s. of Abr., m. Melita 

Beecher, d. of John of Cheshire, Oct. 

31, 1796, and d. Oct. 10, 1820. 

1. Lowis, b. Dec. ig, 1797; d. Aug. 5, 1804. 

2. Sukey, b. Dec. 19, 1799. 

3. Tempe, b. Sept. 8, 1803. 

4. Ansel, b. June 20, 1806. 

5. Samuel, b. Nov. 20, 1810. 

6. Lois, b. Apr. 8, 1813. 

7. A dau., b. Feb. 2; d. Feb. 9, 1816. 

Frederick Hotchkiss, Esq., s of David, 
m. Rhoda Hopkins, d. of John, Mch. 

9. 1790. 

1. Marrilla, b. Mch. 11, 1791. 

2. Chloe, b. Apr. 16, 1794; d. Apr. 22, 1812. 

3. Julia, b. Feb. 7, 1796 [m. Jonah Woodruff] . 

4. Uavid Miles, b. Nov. 27, 1797. 

5. Laura, b. Sept. 4, 1800 [d. 181 ^1. 

6. Clarissa, b. fan. 6, 1806 [m. Elisha Hall]. 
'I'wo inf., d."iSo6 and 1808. 1 

Rhoda d. Mch. 12, 1814 [and Fred. m. 

Tabitha, wid. of Barrett, and d. of 

Phineas Castle]. 
George F. Hotchkiss m. Caroline E. 
Harrison of Bristol, Nov. 12, 1849. 

Gideon Hotchkiss [b. Dec. 5, 1716], s. of 
Stephen, m Anne Brocket, d. of John 
—all of Wallingford— June 16, 1737. 

1. Jesse, b. Oct. o, 1738. 

2. David, b. Apr. 5, 1740. 

3. Abraham, b. and d. May 3, 1742. 

4. Abraham, b. Mch. 25, 1743. 

5. Gideon, b. Dec. 31, 1744 [m. Mary Scott and d. 

Jan. 6, 1819]. 

6. Hulda, b. June 27, 1747; m. J. Payne. 

7. Anna, b. Oct. 22, 1749; m. R. Williams. 

8. Amos, b. Nov. 24, 1751. 

9. Submit, b. June 2, 1753 [m. David Payne] . 

10. Titus, b. June 26, 1755. 

11. Eben, b. Dec. 13, 1757. 
[12. Asahel, b. Feb. 15, 1760]. 

12. Still-born, July 27, 1762. 

Anne d. Aug. i, 1762 [a. 46], and Gid- 
eon m. Mabel Stiles [d. of Isaac] of 
Woodbury, Feb. 22, 1763, and d. Sept. 
3, 1807, a. 91.^ 

Mabel, b. May 23, 1764; m. C. Judd. 
Phebe, b. Aug. 29, 1765. 
Hannah, b. Oct. 14; d. Nov. 26, 1766. 
Stiles, b. Jan. 30, 1768. 

17. Olive, b. Nov. 21, 1769. 

18. Millicent, b. May 6, 1771. 
[20. Amzi, b. July 3, 1774]. 

(These are numbered as on the record). 

Gideon M. Hotchkiss: 

Lif., d. Feb. I, i8n.9 

Gideon O. Hotchkiss m. Nancy Smith, 

Sept. 5, 1S30. 
Harris Hotchkiss m. Ann J. Martin of 

Woodbridge, Nov. 20, 1830. 
Henrj; Hotchkiss ni. Rosetta Baldwin, 

May 23. 1S35, 
Isaac and Rhoda Hotchkiss:' 

Nelson and Sheldon, bap. Nov. 2, 1821. 
;SIil(>, bap. July 7, 1822. 

Jesse Hotchkiss, s. of Gid., m. Charity 
Mallory, d. of Peter of Strat, Oct. 2, 



Hotchkiss. Hotchkiss. 

1759, and d. Sept. 29, 1776 [with the 
army]. 

1. Asael, b. Feb. 15, 1760. 

2. Charrity, b. Mch. 24, 1761. 

3. Kulah, b Mch. 13, 1762; d. Oct. 24, 1776. 

4. Gabril, b. Aug. 13, 1763; d. Jan. 22, 1765. 

5. Rebecka, b. Jan. 7, 1765. 

6. Temperance, b. Dec. 3, 1767. 

7. Apalina, b. Jan. 3, 1768. 

8. Cloe, b. Jan. 5, 1771. 

o. Anna, b. May 19, 1772. 

10, Huldah, b. Mch. g, 1774. 

11. Jesse, b. Aug. 3, 1776. 

Joel Hotchkiss, s. of Wait, m. Mary 
Rogers, d. of Deac. Josiah, Feb. 6, 

1785. 

I. Asenath, b. Mch. 23, 17S7. 

Joel Hotchkiss, s. of Abr., m. Esther 
Beecher, d. of Benjamin of Cheshire, 
June 16, 1803. 

1. Calvin, b. July 19, 1804. 

2. Horace, b. June 14, 1806; d. Mch. 14, 1807. 
Abraham, bap. June 2, 1809.8 

James (Ulbert, bap. Sept. 11, 1822. 

John Hotchkiss, s. of Abr., m. Susanna 
Williams, d. of Dan., May 3, 1790 [and 
d. 1837]. 

1. Levi, b. Jan. iS, 1791. 

2. Ransom, b. Feb. 11, 1793. 

3. Hannah, b. July 5, 1797. 

4. Fanny, b. Nov. 29, 1801. 

5. Bronson, b. May 25, 1805. 

Jonah Hotchkiss, Jr.:^ 

Hannah and Sarah, bap. Mch. 3, 1799. 
Hiram, bap. Apr. 12, 1801. 

Julia Hotchkiss m. G. Bouton, 1823. 

Julius Hotchkiss, s. of Woodward of 
Prospect, m. Apr. 29, 1832, Melissa 
Perkins of Oxford, b. Apr. 21, 1810. 

1. Cornelia Augusta, b. in Oxford, July 6, 1835. 

2. Melissa Amelia, b. Mch. i, 1842. 

3. Mary Ann, b. Dec. 13, 1S44. 

4. Julia Frances, b. Feb. 7, 1847. 

Julius L. Hotchkiss of Bethany m. So- 

phronia M. Hotchkiss, June 2, 1846. 
Laura Hotchkiss m. Miles Todd, 1830. 
Laura Hotchkiss m. G. Lounsbury, 1844. 
Lauren and Nancy Hotchkiss:'' 

Lucy Emeline, Bela Edwin, and John Benham, 

bap. May 27, 1821. 
Giles Gilbert, bap. Apr. 13, 1823. 

Lewis Hotchkiss of Woodbridge m. 

Sarah Ann Porter [d. of Dr. Jesse], 

Dec. II, 1S31. 
Lorana Hotchkiss m. Amos Osborn, 

1776. 
Lyman Hotchkiss: 

Matilda, bap. July 14, 1799.'-* 
Polly, bap. June 30, 1811. 

Lyman Hotchkiss of Prospect m. Sarah 

Ann Scott, Apr. 2, 1837. 
Martha Hotchkiss m. S. Nichols, 1775. 
Mary Hotchkiss m. Sam. Mix, 1781. 
Mary Hotchkiss m. I. Nichols, 1840. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP73 



HOTCHKISS. HOTCHKISS. 

Mary A. Hotchkiss m. W. Lounsbury, 

1S46. 

Mary J. Hotchkiss ni. D. M. Phillips, 
1S50. 

Medad Hotchkiss m. Rebeckah Spencer, 

Feb. 7, 17S7.' 
Oliver Hotchkiss and Esther: 

Diman (?) and Elizabeth, bap. Dec. 5, iSii. 

Patty A. Hotchkiss m. Ed. Benhani, 
1844. 

Rosetta Hotchkiss m. Luther Adams, 
1S46. 

Sally Hotchkiss m. Sam. Osborn, 1797. 

Sarah E. Hotchkiss m. H. Payne, 1843. 

Silas Hotchkiss [b. Nov. 22, 1719], s. of 
Stephen of Wallingford, m. Lois Bron- 
son, wid. of Benj., May 12, 174S. 

1. Cloe, b. Jan. 19, 1748-9. 

2. Hester, b. Jan. 2, 1750-1; m. Joseph Payne. 

3. Stephen, b. Aug. 24, 1753. 

4. Truman, b. June 18, 1760 [d. May, 1838]. 

5. Lois, b. INIch. 21; d. Aug. 23, 1763. 

Lois d. Feb. 7, 1776, and Silas m. Abi- 
gail , who d. Aug. 31, 1794. [He 

d. Jan., 1783.] 

Stephen Hotchkiss, s. of Silas, m.Tamar 
Richason, d. of Nathl., Dec. 31, 177S, 
and d. Sept. 9, 1S26. 

1. Joseph, b. Feb. 13, 1781; d. Mch. 12, 1786. 

2. Clarissa, b. July 11, 1784. 

3. Esther, b. Sept. 11, 1787; m. H. Nichols. 

4. Cloe, b. Feb. 18, 1790; m. Wm. Baldwin. 

5. Lois, b. Nov. 28, 1795. 

6. Irene, b. Apr. 29, 1798; d. Sept. 8, iSoo. 

7. Phebe Irene, b. Nov. 3, 1800; ra. J. E. Chatfield, 

and Humphrey Nichols. 

Stephen Hotchkiss m. Maria Goodyear 

— both of New Haven — June 7, 1827. 
Stiles Hotchkiss: 

Inf., d. May 18, 1805.8 

Truman Hotchkiss:' 

Leonard Rirhards, bap. Sept. 28, 1817. 

Wait Hotchkiss [and Lvdia Webster of 
Bolton]: 

3. Sarah, b. Mch. 27, 1765. 

4. Abner, b. May 24, 1771. 

Lydia d. Apr. 26, 1776, and Wait m. 
Deborah, Relick of Isaac Twitchell, 
Oct. 10, 1776. 

5. Luther, b. Dec. 19, 1778. 

6. Miles, b. July 23, 1783. 

7. Isaac, b. Oct. 16, 17S7. 

William Robert Hotchkiss m. Rebecca 
Leavenworth, Nov. 24, 1830. She d. 
Apr. II, 1838. 

Woodward Hotchkiss, s. of Amos, m. 
Polly (:\Iary) Castle, d. of Capt. Phineas, 
Apr. 2, 1797. 

1. Castle, b. May 10, 1798. 

2. William, b. Aug., 1800. 

3. Roday, b. Jan. 25, 1803. 

4. Polly, b. July 3, 1805. 



Hotchkiss. How. 

5. Julius, b. July ii, 1810. 

6. Albert, b. Apr. 10, 1813. 

7. Sarah C, b. Sept. 8, 1S18. 

Benoni Hough m. Tabitha Wilcox, Nov. 

19, I7S9.-1 

Isaac Hough of Wolcott m. Laura Ann 

Jiihnson, Apr. 6, 1S35. 
E. D. Houghton m. Julia Booth of Rox- 

bury, Sept. i, 1836. 
Aaron How m. Martha Rogers, May 27, 

1773- 

1. Mary, b. Apr. 16, 1774. 

2. Calvin, b. Feb. 20, 1776. 

Anna Howes m. Eleazer Scott, 17S0. 
Daniel How, s. of Daniel of Wallingford, 

m. Ann Bronson, d. of Isaac, July 3, 

1734, and d. Apr. 22, 1745. 

1. Aaron, b. July 23, 1735; d. Apr. 2, 1737. 

2. Ann, b. Sept. 2, 1737 [m. Isaac Tuttle of Wood.] 

3. Huldah. b. Aug. 24, 1739. 

4. Daniel, b. Oct. 4, 1741. 

5. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 16, 1743; d. May 7, 1745. 

(There was also Elnathan (by first wife?) 
not capable of caring for himself ace. 
to his father's will.) 
Daniel How, s. of Daniel, m. DamerisDut- 
ton, d. of Deac. [David], June 23, 1763. 

1. Elizabeth, b. May 31, 1765. 

2. Aaron, b. Feb. 12, 1766. 

Elizabeth How, d. of Dan., m. Caleb 

Clark, 1756. 

Ephraim How m. Abigail Hubbard, 
Mch. 10, 1781.^ 

Heman Howe, b. Oct. 24, iSoi, and Lo- 
rinda Holcomb, b. Dec. 12, 1812— both 
from Canaan— m. Mch. 28, 1835. 

1. Caroline, b. in Can., Feb. 15, 1836. 

2. Heman, b. in Can., May 2, 1838. 

3. Jane, b. in Can., May 29, 1839. 
4 John, b. in Can., May 16, 1840. 
5. Charley, b. Aug. 23, 1846. 

John How and Abigail [d. of John Sutt- 
liff]: 

Samuel. Abigail; ra. David Blakeslee ? Sarah; 
m. Cephas Ford and Abr. Luddington. Mar- 
tha; m. E. Ford. 

5. Hannah, b. Mch. 6, 1736; m. O. Scott. 

6. John, b. Apr. 6, 1738; d. Dec. 6, 1758. 

7. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 3, 1740. 

8. Mary, b. May i, 1742; her first child: 

Timothy Humaston, b. Nov. 6, 1761. 
2 Mary, b. Nov. 8, 1767. 
0. Lydea, b. Apr. 10, 1744; m. S. Potter. 

10. Zackkeus, b. Aug. 14, 1746. 

11. Ephraim, b. [and cl.] . 

Abigail d. Jan. 22, 1749, and John m. 
Hannah Ehvell, wid. of Eben., July 17, 
1754. He d. Jan. 7, 1767. 

Samuel How, s. of John, m. Mary Co- 
ben, d. of Gideon AUyn, Apr. 16, 1750. 

I and 2, twins; d. soon after born, 

3. Ephraim, b. Dec. 19, 1750. 

4. Abigail, b. Jan. 8, 1753. 

5. Mary, b. Nov. 7, 1754, 



74 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATBRBURY. 



How. Hull. 

6. Eunis, b. Nov. 24, 1756. 

7. John, b. Oct. 22, 1762. 

8. Aljigail, b. Sept. 13, 1764. 

Samuel How:^ 

Cloe. b. Jan. 20, 1770. 

Sarah E. Howe m. W. Pickett, 1S46. 
Zacchaus How m. Esther Thompson, 
Dec. 7. 1772. 

I. Jobn, b. Nov. 8, 1775. 

Amanda Hoyt m. O. Albro, 1S29. 

Abigail Hubbard m. Ephraim How, 
i7Si.-* 

Daniel Hubbard of Middletown m. Han 
nah Warner, Nov. 20, 1842. 

David Hubbard m. Rhoda Guernsey, 
Jan. 10, 1782.^ 

1. Betsey, b. Mch. 28, 1782. 

2. Jared, b. Jan. 9, 1785. 

Josiah and Abigail Hubbard: 

6. Eunice, b. Oct. 29, 1760. 

7. Llavid, b. Aug. 20, 1762. 

8. Amos, b. Aug. 28, 1764; d. Aug. 1773. 

9. Hezekiah, b. Sept. 21, 1766. 

10. Joseph, b. July 10, 1768. 

11. Lydia, b. Feb. 10, 1770. 

12. Jacob, b. Dec. 10, 1771; d. Aug. 7, 1773. 

13. Anna, b. Aug. 2, 1773. 

14. Rachel, b. Nov. 7, 1774. 

Nathan Hubbard, s. of John, dec'd, of 
Middletown, m. Lydia Judd, d. of 
Nathl. of Wallingford, Jan. i, 1735-6. 

1. John, b. Dec. 22, 1736. 

2. Imnier, b July 30, 1741; d. Jan. 13, 1744-5. 

3. Eli, b. May 28, 1745. 

4. Nathan, b. at Wal., Feb. 29, 1747-8. 

5. Lydia, b June 23, 1750. 

6. Judd Inimer, b. Aug. 19 1753. 

7. Mary, b. Julv 2?, 17^56. 

8. Nathanl., b. Nov. 17, 1758. 

Hart E. Hubbell m. Lucy Davis— both of 

Xaui^atuek — Nov. 22, 1848. 
Nehemiah Hubbel m. Lucinda Welton, 

Nov. I), 1774.=' 

Frederick Hudson m. ]\Iargaret Lallv, 

Oct. 6, i85i.« 

John Hulbert m. Margaret Lannan, June 

15. iS5i- 

Abigail Hull m. Joshua Moss, 1764. 
Amos G. Hull [s. of Dr. Nimrod], m. 

Emily M. Porter [d. of ThomasJ— all 

of Salem — Nov, 24, 1S36. 
Dr. Benjamin Hull dyed at Wat'town, 

Jan. 16, 1767, and left two chil. — Benj.' 

and Esther, who m. Noah Warner. 

His wid. m. Jotham Curtis. 
Betsey Hull m. S. Thompson, 1801. 
Clarissa Hull m. B. S. Judd, 1S39. 

David Hull of New Town m. Rebecca A. 
Tuttle [d. of Daniel], Feb. 28, 1838. 

Eli Hull of Derby m. Philene Beebe, 
Sept. II, 1783.' 



Hl'LL. HUMASTON. 

Elizabeth V. Hull m. D. A. Minor, 1830. 

Esther Hull m. Horace Porter, 1845. 

Ezra Hull m. Annis Johnson, July iS, 
1771. 

1. John, b. Feb. 21, 1772. 

2. Jane, b. Feb. 8, 1774 [m. David Hoadley]. 

Garry Hull, b. Jan. 10, 1803, s. of John, 
m. Melissa Baldwin, d. of David, Feb. 
15, 1825. 

I. Ellen L., b. Apr. 30, 1826; m. B. S. Bristol. 
2 Harriet M.. b. May 7, 1828. 

3. Stiles, b. Nov. 19, 1830; d. Mch. 22, 1832. 

4. David B., b. Feb. 21, 1833. 

5. John L., b. Jan. 22, 1838. 

Hannah Hull m. Obad. Scovill, 1752. 
Hannah Hull, wid., d. Aug. 7, 1807.* 
Hannah Hull m. Chas. Nichols, 1821. 

Henry A. Hull of Litchfield m. Sarah A. 
Sandland, Sept. 23, 1838. 

James Hull, s. of John of New Haven, 
m. Susanna Arnold, d. of Nathl., Aug. 
22, 1733. 

I. James, b. July 25, 1734; d. Dec. 4, 1736. 

Susanna d. Dec. 9, 1736, and James m. 
Jane Johnson, d. of John, dec'd, June 

8, 173S. 

Joel Hull and his wife [Mehitable Gunn, 
d. of Jobamah and Hannah]: 

Orren, b. Feb. 10, 1794. 
[Alma, b. and d. 1796.] 
Alma, b. Aug. 29, 1797. 
Henry, b. Jan. 12, 1804. 
Daniel, b. May 28, 1806. 

Mary Hull m. Eben. Bronson, 1716. 

Mary Hull m. Ithiel Fancher, 1774. 

Mercy Hull m. Eben. Porter, 1739. 

Nancy Hull m. L. S. Lewis, 1835. 

[Dr. Nimrod Hull m. Amy Lewis, and d. 
Jan. 26, 1S24. 

1. Elizabeth; m. Ransom Culver. 

2. Sarah (Nancy?); m. Lewis Hine. 

3. Horace F.; m. Elizabeth Twitchell. 

4. Lawrence Spencer; m. Lucetta Porter. 

5. Emma, d. young. 

6. John Gould, ) -c- ■ , i>». . 

and >■ JiP'scopal Minister; educated at 

7. Amos Gift, j ^^'<=- ^- ^- 3° ys. 

Nimrod m. Amelia Seely. 

8. MaryC; m. Lewis Curtiss. 

9. George \V.; ra. Nichols.] 

Priscilla Hull m. Samuel Scott, 1727. 
Prosper Hull of Colebrook m. Betsey 

Atkins of Wolcott, Aug. 28, 1825. 
Sarah Hull m. Rev. M. Leavenworth, 

1750. 
Sarah M. Hull m. Garry Bissell, 1831. 
Amos Humaston m. Abigail Allin, Nov, 

5> 1771- 

1. Enos, b. Mch. 11, 1772. 

2. Thankful, b. June 26, 1773; d. Feb., 1774. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP75 



HUMMASTOX. HlNCERFOKD. 

Caleb Hummaston [b. Feb. 20, 1715-16], 
s. of John, m. Susanna Todd, d. of 
Sam.— both of No. H.— Nov. 14, 1738, 
and d. Mch. 6, 1776. [His wife d. 
Sept. 24, 1806.] 

1. Jesse, b. Dec. 12, 1739; d. 

2. Sarah, b. Dec. 9, 1742; m. Stephen Bronson. 

3. Hannah, b. June 25, 1745. 

4. Susannah, b. June 19, 1747. 

5. Jesse, b. Dec. 4, 1749 [m. Abi Blakeslee]. 

6. Mehitable. b. Jan. i, 1752; m. I. Fenn. 

7. Content, b. Aug. 3, 1754; d. Feb. 3, 1773. 

8. Phebe, b. Dec. 5, 1756; m. Jesse Turner. 

9. Annise, b. July 24, 1759; m. S. Sutliff. 
10. Martha, b. Dec. 20, 1762; m. D. Potter. 

Damaris Humastonm. A. Seymour, 1767. 
David Humerston [s. of John] m. Ruth 

Bassett, d. of Joseph — all of North 

Haven — Nov. i, 1743. 

1. Rhoda, b. Jan. 17, 1744-5; d. Sept. 13, 1750. 

2. Joel, b. Apr. 14, 1747; d. .Sept. 22, 1750. 

3. Lydia, b. July 30, 1749; '^- Sept. 18, 1750. 

4. Rhoda, b. May 27, 1751 [m. Jacob Daggett]. 

5. Joel, b. Nov. 12, 1753. 

6. Lidea, b. Mch. i, 1756; m. Timothy Atvvater. 

7. David, b. Feb. 12, 1758. 
i 8. Ashbel, b. June 8, 1760. 

■ 9. Cloe, b. Nov. 3, 1762 [m. Turner]. 

!io. Bede. b. June 8, 1765 [m. R. Atwater]. 
II. Hannah, b. June 8, 1768. 
Esther Humaston d. Sept. 17, 1788, ■* 
Hannah Humiston m. Ephraim Allen, 
j 1754- 
[John Humiston and Abigail: 

Mary, b. May 22, 1735]; m. A. Blakeslee? 

I Noah Humaston m. Lucv Barnes, Nov. 
I 17, 1768. 

I I. Tempe, b. Aug. 21, 1769. 

i Roswel Humiston of Stratford m. Me- 
! linda Atwater, Aug. i, 1S31. 
1 [Samuel G. Humiston m. Ruth Holmes, 
I d. of Israel, .] 

I Esther S., bap. Jan. 28, 1821. 

''. Mary Isabella, Ijap. May 19; d. Dec. 26, 1822. 

s Thankful Humaston m. A. Dutton, 1764. 
Timothy Humaston: 

Esther, b. Aug. 25, 1786. 

Ann Hungerford m. Jas. Tyler, 1763. 
[David Hungerford d. 1758. Sarah, his 
wid., m. Thomas Doolittle, 1761. 

Heirs: David, Sarah Andrews, James d. before 
1760, Joel, Jonah, Anne, and Reuben.] 

David Hungerford, s. of David, m. Ro- 
sannah Williams, d. of Mr. Williams of 
Narrowganset, June 5, 1760, and d. 
Jan. 29, 1777. 

1. James, b. May 3, 1761. 

2. Elizabeth, b. Aug. 5, 1762; m. Seth Barthol- 

omew. 

3. Mary, 1 m. Abiel Bartholomew, 1785. 

and vb. Nov. 13, 1764. 

4. Sarah, 1 

5. Rosannah, b. Nov. 2, 1769. 

David Hungerford, s. of Jonas, m. Mrs. 
Dollv Tuttle, Relic of Daniel, Nov. 24, 
1801.' 



Hr.NGERFORD. HuRLBUT. 

1. A son, b. and d. Apr. 23, 1803. 

The mother d. the same day, and David 
m. Jemima Scott, d. of Simeon, Apr. 

2, 1S04 [and d. June 21, 1S38, a. 64]. 

2. Elizabeth, b. Nov. 29, 1806; m. L. Hall. 

3. Lydia, b. May 17, 1810; m. M. Sackett. 

4. Rhoda Ann, b. Sept. 12, 1813; m. M. Sackett. 

Joel Hungerford [b. about 1740, in E. 
Haddam, s. of David] and Mabel [Gran- 
niss, d. of Stephen, m. at Southington, 
May 22, 1764]. 

I. Hannah, b. ^lay 4, 1765. 

Jonas Hungerford m. Elizabeth Pardy, 
Oct. 27, 1773 [and d. 1817, a. 73]. 

1. David, b. Nov. 20, 1774. 

2. Rachel, b. Feb. 23, 1776. 
^. John, b. Oct. 25, 1777. 

4. Rhoda, b. May S, 1779. 

5. Esther, b. Nov. 9, 1780. 

6. Lydia, b. Dec. 29, 178 — . 

7. Sarah, b. Apr. i, 1785. 

8. Thomas, b. Dec. 2, 1786. 

Sally Hungerford m. Calvin Munson, 
1794- 

Sarah Hungerford m. Ambrose Curtiss, 
1850. 

Zenas Hungerford, s. of Thomas of Bris- 
tol, m. Elizabeth, d. of Dr. Clifford, 
Aug. 9, 1791. 

1. Comfort, b. j\Iay 12, 1794. 

2. Betsey, b. Oct. i; d. Oct. 24, 1796. 

Elizabeth d. Oct. 8, 1796, and Zenas 
m. Mary Cande, d. of Tim. [179S]. 

3. Betsey, b. June 5, 1799; m. Alf. Bryan. 

4. Carlos Cande, b. Feb. 7, 1802. 

5. Julia M., b. June 27, 1811. 

[Mary d. Dec. 28, 1831] and Zenas m. 
Sabra Chipman, Dec. 28, 1833. 

Emily Hunt m. Samuel Bronson, 1803. 

S. Graham Hunt of Bristol, 111., m. Celia 
A. Mase, Oct. 5, 1851. 

Clara L. Hurd of Salem m. Maria L. Hall 
of Plymouth, July 8, 1S43. 

David B. Hurd, b. May 28, 1S02, s. of 
Russell of Woodbur\', m. Mary War- 
ner, d. of Ard, May 2, 1S24. 

1. Mary Ann. b. Jan. 30, 182;; m. W. A. Royce. 

2. Elizabeth J., b. Nov. 23, 1830; m. B. L. Scott. 

3. Margarett L., b. July 31, 1832. 

4. Nancy E., b. Oct. 27, 1836. 

5. Caroline N. H., b. June 20, 1842. 

Graham Hurd m. Polly Bronson, Oct. 

21, 1S38. 
Anne Hurlbut m. Truman Baldwin, 1797. 

Joseph Hurlbut, 3d, s. of Joseph, Jr., of 
Woodbury, m. Martha Scott, d. of Jon., 
Sr., Apr. I, 1725. 

1. Rachel, b. Jan. 28, 1725-6. 

2. Died as soon as born. 

3. Ehsha, b. May 22, 1730. 

4. .Mary, b. June 12, 1732. 

Mary Hurlbut m. Jon. Scott, 1725, 



76 AP 



HISTORY OF WATEBBUBT. 



HuRLF,Y. Jeffrey. 

Jeremiah Hurley m. Margaret Hourigan 
— both of Plymouth — Feb. 3, 1S50. 
Abigail Hyde m. H. ^lunson, 1S40. 
Eliza Ann Hyde m. Garry Atwood, 1S34. 
Vincent Ibbertson m. Eliza Bassford, 

May 27, 1849. 
Alonzo Isbell m. Fanny E. vSmith, Mch. 

9, 1842. 
Cynthia M. Isbell m. G. L. Smith, 1S40. 

Hanford Isbel from Nau. m. Harriet An- 
drews of Prospect, d. of Samuel, Oct., 
1839- 

1. Mary Eliz., b. in Nau., Sejit., 1840. 

2. Ethena, b. Apr.; d. July, 1844. 

Harriet A. Isbell m. A. C. Sparry, 1842. 
John L. Isbel m. Eliza J. Botsford of 

Derby, Aug. 27, 1837. 
Sarah A. Isbell m. G. A. Johnson, 1845. 
[Abram Ives, s. of Dr. Ambrose, m. 

Mary Buckingham, d. of John, Feb. 25, 

IS39-] 
Anne Ives m. John Sutliff, 1741. 
Elizabeth Ives m. N. Baldwin, 1775. 
Giles Ives from North Haven, b. Apr. 

25, 1774, and Abigail Gilbert from 

Hamden, b. Mch. 29, 177S, m. Oct. 9, 

1799. 

1. Charry, b. May 6, i8oi; m. Linsley, and M. 

Fowler. 

2. Esther, b. Apr. 8, 1805; m. Philo Brown. 

3. Caroline, b. Oct. 4, 1807; m. D. T. Bishop. 

4. George Merwin, b. May 18, 1817. 

Lydia Ives m. Timothy Jones, 1779.'' 
Lydia Ives m. T. Hammond, Jr., 1783.^ 
Maria Ives m. Luther Hall, 1833. 
Olive Ives m. Merrit Lane, 1S45. 
Silas Ives of Cheshire m. Betsey Payne, 

Feb. 1, 1826. 
Stephen and Mary Ives: 

3, Lucy, b. Mch. 19, 1779. 

Thankful Ives m. Joseph Foot, 176S. 
Augusta Jackson m. H. Freeman, 1S50. 

(col.) 
Bartholomew Jacobs m. Abigail Curtiss, 

d. of Daniel, dec'd, Apr. 22, 1751. 

1. Susannah, b. June 13, 1752. 

2. Keziah, b. June 14, 1754. 

3. Daniel, b. Oct. 20, 1756. 

4. Jonah, b. Mch. 29, 1759. 

5. Sabre, b. Mch. 8, 1762. 

6. Adonijah, b. June 3, 1764. 

Grace Jacobs m. Orrin Grilley, 1S31. 
Sarah James m. Wm. Stanley [1823], 
and Joseph Shipley, 1S39. 

Lorinda Janes m. C. A. Blackman, 1832. 

Edward Jeffrey, b. July S, 1S13, and 
Emma Moore, b. Dec. iS, 1816 — both 
from Birm., Eng.— m. Dec. 27, 1S35. 



Jeffrey. Johnson. 

1. John Ed., b. in Eng., Auk. 12, 1S38. 

2. Henry Luzerne, b. Mch. 21, 1846. 

Mrs. Joseph Jeffrey d. Oct. 27, 1837, a- 

60.- 
Joseph P. Jeffrey and Mary Ann Lillias 

^Millwood — both from Birm., Eng. — m. 

Sept. 9, 1S38. 

I. Catharine Maria, b. July 2, 1839. 
J. Emma Jane, b. Feb. 17, 1841. 

Rebeccah Jenkins m. Enos Ford, 1772. 

Abigail Johnson m. David Alcox, 1767. 

Abner Johnson, s. of Abner, merchant of 
Wal , m. Lydia Bunnel, d. of Eben- 
ezer of Cheshire, June 30, 1773. 

1. Van Julius, b. Apr. 12; d. Nov. 3, 1774. 

2. Fanny, b. Feb. 28, 1776; m. F. Leavenworth. 

3. Narcissa, b. May 28, 1778. 

4. Cloe, b. June i5, 1781; d. Feb. 3, 1782. 

Annis Johnson m. Ezra Hull, 1771. 
Betsey Johnson m. David Warner, 1S19. 

Charles M. Johnson of Woodbury m. 

Ann Eliza Kinkham, Apr. 3, 1S47. 
Cornelia M. Johnson m. Chas. Benedict, 

Cornelius Johnson and Elizabeth [eldest 
d. of Dr. Benjamin Lewis of Walling- 
ford. She d. iSoo, a. 90]: 

3. Asa, b. June 24, 1754; d. Feb. 8, 1758. 

4. Jesse, b. July 27, 1756. 

5. Cornelius, b. Nov. 13, 1758; d. June, 1762. 

6. Lyman, b. Jan. 21, 1761. 

1. Asa; d. Dec. 13, 1751. 

2. Elizabeth; d. Sept. 12, 1766. 

Deborah Johnson m. Jabez Harrison, 

1772. 
Ebenezer Johnson s. of Ebenezer of Der- 
by, dec'd [m. Mrs. Lucy Barnes, Mch. 
19. 1754]- 

First child b. May 19, 1755. 

Lucy d. May 22, 1755, and Ebenezer m. 

Thankful Upson, d. of Capt. Stephen, 

Dec. 15, 1756. 
Elizabeth Johnson m. James Prichard, 

1 72 1, and Stephen Upson, 1750. 
Elizabeth Johnson m. Hiram Chipman, 

1842. 
Emily Johnson m. G. AV. Cook, 1S37. 
Esther Johnson m. Frederic Treadway, 

1S36. 
Eunice Johnson m. Abr. Osborn, 1762. 
Eunice Johnson m. Isaac Towner, i8io.9 
Eunice Johnson, wid., d. Apr. 5, 1839, a. 

72.-^ 
Franklin Johnson of Walhngford m. 

Salome Holt, Oct. 22, 1833. 
Gideon A. Johnson of Oxford m. Sarah 

A. Isbell of Nau., Dec. 11, 1845. 
Hannah Johnson m. Joseph Brown, 1750 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP77 



Johnson. Johnson. 

Hannah Johnson m. Th. Osborn, 1777. 
Hannah Johnson m. Sam. Benham, 1799. 
Hannah E. Johnson m. A. Adams, 1S20. 
Harriet Johnson m. Benj. Grinnels. 1825. 
Isaac S. Johnson m. Harriet Hoadley [d. 

of Chester]— both of Nau.— Nov. 30, 

iS34- 
James Johnson and Abigail: 

1. Abigail, b. June lo, 1727. 

2. Eunice, b. June 21, 1729. 

3. Mehittable, b. May 27, 1731. 

James B. Johnson m. Mary Law, Dec. 

26, 1850. 
Jarvis Johnson, b. Jan. 31, 1805, s. of 

Gideon, and Maria Strong, b, Sept. 15, 

1815, d. of Noah— all of Southbury— 

m. Aug., 1832. 

1. Mary Jane, b. June 16, 1S34. 

2. Emily Maria, b. Dec. 0, 1836. 

3. INIartha Elizabeth, b. Dec. 9, 1S40; d. 1S46. 

4. Franklin Edward, b. Aug. 10, 1845. 

Jesse Johnson, s. of Cornelius, ni. wid. 
Hannah Beach, relict of John, Aug. 23, 
1780. 

1. Sarah, b. Dec. 6, 1780. 

2. Hannah, b. Mch. 29, 1782. 

Joel Johnson, s. of Joseph of Derby, ni. 
Samira Frisbie, d. of David of Wolcott, 
Apr. II, 1827. 

1. David Franklin, b. Feb. 10, 1828. 

2. Henry Carlos, b. Nov. 8, 1S30. 

3. William E., b. July 25, 1843; drowned 1845. 

[John Johnson d. 1739. Had wife, Mercy; 
chil.: Jane (w. of James Hull) and Si- 
lence. 

Larmon Johnson of Oxford m. Anna 
Mix, d. of Philo, Mch. 13, 1826. 

Laura A. Johnson m. Isaac Hough, 1835. 

Lorana Johnson m. Dennis Trian, 1823. 

Lydia A. Johnston m. C. B. Lawrence, 
1847. 

Lyman Johnson, s. of Cornelius, m. 
Mary Hoadley, d. of Nathaniel, Mch. 6, 
1780. 

1. Elizabeth, b. Sept. g, 1780. 

2. Truman, b. June 18, 1783. 

3. Ana, b. Jan. 9, 1787. 

Mary Johnson m. Samuel Barnes, 1722. 
Mary Johnson m. Jeliiel Castle, 1802.5 
Mary Johnson m. D. W. Lee, 1S23. 
Mary Johnson m. Wright Parks, 1834. 
Mille Johnson m. J. E. Thompson, 1829. 
Robert Johnson and Sarah: 

1. Hannah, b. [1729]; d. Apr. 27, 1733. 

2. Benjamin, b. Apr. 18, 1731; d. Jan., 1744-5. 

3. Hannah, b. Apr. 22, 1733. 

4. George, b. Jan. 8, 1734-5- 

5. Robert, b. Feb. 9, 1736-7. 

6. Sarah, b. Apr. 7, 1739. 

7. Ruth, b. Mch. 26, 1742. 

8. Samuel, b. Sept. 2, 1744. 



Johnson. Judd. 

0. Rachel, b. Aug. 27, 1747; d. Aug. 24, 1749. 
m. A dau., still-born Oct. 29, 1749. 

Sabra Johnson m. Philo Prichard, 17S3. 
Sarah Johnson m. John Hopkins, 1749. 
Silence Johnson, s. of John, m. Sarah 

Moses, d. of John of Simsbury, Dec. 5, 

1733- 

1. Sarah, b. July 5, 1734. 

2. John, b. June 24, 1736. 

3. Lemuel, b. Nov. 14 and d. Nov. 29, 1739. 

4. Mary, b. June 12, 1741. 

5. Jane, b. Mch. 25, 1744. 

6. Elihu, b. Aug. 22, 1747. 

Theodosia Johnson m. Silas Gunn, 1826. 
Thomas Johnson m. Mary Kegan, Feb. 

28, 1S51. 
William Johnson of Harwinton m. Bet- 
sey Knowlton, Feb. 28, iS4o,''who d. 
Jan. 31, 1843, a. 74.- 

Willis Johnson m. Sarah Castle, Jan. i, 

1 843 • 
Wilson Johnson m. Mary A. Finch, Mch. 

12, 1S37. 
Caroline Jones m. W. S. Steele, 1S37. 
Jane Jones m. Harvey Judd, 1S29. 

Joseph Jones from Birm., Eng., and Mar- 
garett Webb from Stafford Co., Eng., 
m. Sept. 8, 1823. 

1. Eliza, b. in Birm., June 11, 1824. 

2. Charles, b. in Birm., Mch. 8; d. Sept. 1826. 

3. John, b. in Birm., Mch. 20, 1828. 

4. Sarah, b. Dec. 16, 1831. 

5. Henry, b. Oct. 4, 1834; drowned Mch. 12, 1840. 

Maria Jones m. Daniel Judd, 1S51. 
Olive Jones: 

I'hilena, bap. June 23, 1822.8 

Philena Jones m. A. Anderson, 1835. 

Thomas Jones, b. Jan. 6, 1805, and Eliza- 
beth Cowd, b. June 23, 1810 — both from 
Birm., Eng. — m. in Brooklyn, N. Y. 

1. William W. H. F., b. Nov. 30, 1826. 

2. Elizabeth Mary Ann, b. Feb. 8, 1829. 

Timothy Jones m. Lydia Ives, Apr. S, 

1. Philena K., b. Feb. 20, 1780. 

2. Beloste (?) b. June 8, 1784. 

William H. Jones from Birm., Eng., m. 
Mary Steele, d. of Norman of Hum- 
phreysville, Oct. 25, 1825. Chil. b. in 
Attleboro, Mass.: 

1. Sarah Stafford, b. Aug. 24, 1826. 

2. Norman, b. Apr. 25, 1828; d. 1830. 

3. Caroline Ann, b. June 8, 1830. 

4. William H., b. May 12, 1832. 

5. John Edwin, b. Jan. 25, 1834. 

William Henry Jones m. Sarah Shipley, 

May 17, 1846. 
Amanda Jordan m. D. Brooks, 1844. 
Chauncey Jordan d. Feb. 10, 1836, a, 42.* 
Allyn Southmayd Judd [s. of Timothy] 



<8AP 



inSTOllY OF WATER BUB v. 



JUDI). Jl1>J>. 

m. Joanna Seymour [d. of Richard], 
Sept. lo, 1777.'' 

1. Fanny, b. Feb. 24, 1778. 

2. Polly, b. Mch. 22, 1779. 

3. Timothy, b. Sept. 13, 1780. 

4. Millisent, b. Apr. 21, 1782. 

5. Gaylord, b. Oct. 7, 1784. 

6. Joanna, b. F'ec. i, 1786. 

7. Susanna, b. Nov. 30, 1788. 

Asa Judd, s. of Samnel, m. Millecent 
Silkrig, d. of William, dec'd, Jan. 27, 
1761. 

1. Mercy, b. Nov. 29, 1761. 

2. Samuel, b. Feb. 28, 1763. 

:;. Melicent, b. Mch. 29, 1765. 

[Dr.] Benjamin Judd, s. of John, m. Ab- 
igail Adams, d. of Gillet of Symsbury, 
Jan. 8, 1738-9, who d. Nov. 7, 1755. 

1. A dau., b. Apr. 30, 1739. 

2. Benjamin, b. June 6, 1740. 

3. Thomas, b. Apr. 12, 1743. 

4. Annise, b. Nov. 25, 1744. 

J. Joel, b. July 15, 1748 [m. Mercy Hikcox, and d. 

of small-po.\, 1779]. 
6. Benjamin, I5. June 8, 1755. 

Burrit S. Judd, s. of Harvey (and Jemi- 
ma Hikcox), m. Clarissa Hull, d. of 
Orrin, Dec. 24, 1839. 

1. Harvey, b. in Arkansas, Aug. 8, 1841. 

2. Charles, b. in Arkansas, Sept. 25, 1844. 

3. Amos, born in Nau., Feb. 27, 1845. 

4. Lucy, b. Feb. 16, 1847. 

Chauncey Judd, s. of Isaac, m. Mabel 
Hotchkiss. d. of Capt. Gideon, Sept. 15, 
17S5. [He d. Feb. 24, 1S23, a. 58]. 

Chauncey Judd m. Esther Todd, Sept. 3, 
1S29. 

Clarinda Judd: 

Juliet, b. June 9, 1785.?' 

Daniel Judd [s. of Thomas] m. Maria E 

Jones, Apr. 21, 1S51. 
Ebenezer Judd, s. of John, dec'd, m. 

Mary Hawkins, d. of Joseph, dec'd, of 

Derby, Nov. 17, 1742. 

1. Brewster, b. Jan. 13, 1743-4. 

2. Enoch, b. July 21, 1745. 

3. Ebenezer, b. May 28, 1747. 

4. Sarah, b. Jan. 2, 1748-9; d. May 7, 1755. 

5. David, b. Oct. 11, 1750. 

6. Benajah, b. Sept. 15, 1752. 

7. Amos, b. Sept. 16, 1755. 
Hawkins, bap. Apr. 13, 1766.- 

Ebenezer Judd, s. of Jos., dec'd, m. An- 
nah Charles of New Haven, Feb. 7, 
1765, who d. Aug. 10, 17S2, and her 
child still-born. 

1. Charles, b. Mch. 21, 1766; d. Sept. 20, 1779. 

2. Abigail, b. Mch. 31, 1768; m. D. Landen. 

3. AUin, b. Mch. 19, 1770; d. Feb. 9, 1772. 

4. Allin, b. Mch. 9, 1772. 

5. Amzi, b. Dec. 25, 1774. 

6. Anna, b. Mch. 16, 1777. 

7. Asa, b. Veh. 11, 1780. 

Ebenezer, late of Wat , now residing 
in Goshen, m. Betty Hill, d. of Nathan 
of Cheshire, Oct. 8, 1782. 
8. Ambrose, b. Aug. 23, 1783. 



JiDD. Judd. 

g. Ruth, b. Oct. 19, 1785. 

10. Esther, b. Apr. 19, 1789. 

Electa Judd m. J. W. Bigelow, 1825. 
Elnathan Judd, s. of Wm., m. Miriam 

Richards, d. of Sam., dec'd, Dec. 28, 

1752. 

1. Richards Samuel, b. Oct. 16, 1753. 

2. Clarinda, b. May 16, 1755. 

3. Sarah, b. Sept. 14, 1757. 

4. Dhotha, b. Feb. 26, 1760; m. Jos. Cutler. 

5. Consider, b. June 13; d. June 14, 1762. 

6. Millicent, b. July 7, 1763. 

Esther Judd m. Sam. Peck, 1802. 
Harvey Judd m. Sarah Castle, Aug. 8, 

17S2. 

T. Noali, b. Feb. 19, 17S3. 

Harvey Judd [s. of Isaac] m. Jemima 

Hikcox, Dec. 25, iSoo.^ 
Harvey Judd [s. of Stephen, Jr.] m. 

Sally D. Brown, Dec. 31, 1821. 
Harvey Judd m. Jane E. Jones, June 23, 

1829. 
Henry C. Judd [s. of Thomas] m. Har- 
riet Tompkins, Nov. 3, 1S24. 
An account of the children of Hepzibah 

Judd, the dau. of Thomas of Simsbury 

[and Hepsibah Williams. Thomas was 

gr. son of Lieut. Thomas]. 

I. Stephen, b. Aug. 14, 1751. 
Isaac Judd, s. of Joseph, dec'd, m. Anna 

Williams, d. of Daniel, Jan. 23, 1751-2 

[and d. June 9, 1S08]. 

1. Roswell, b. Nov. 6, 1752. 

2. Rosanna, b. Oct. 6, 1754; m. [Ed. Perkins, and] 

James Brown. 

3. Isaac, b. Nov. 19, 1756. 

4. Walter, b. Nov. '11, 1758. 

5. Apalina, b. Jan. 25, 1761. 

6. Chauncey, b. July 8, 1764. 

7. Anna, ) d. Nov. 29, 1773. 

and Vb. July 6, 1767. 

8. Ruth, ) 

9. Milla, b. Oct. 24, 1769. 
ID. Reuben, b. May 28, 1772. 

11. Asael. b. Jan. 23, 1776. 

Isaac Judd, Jr., s. of Isaac, m. Patience 
Hammond, d. of Thomas, Jul}' 21, 1775. 

John Judd, s. of Left. Thomas, m. Han- 
nah, d. of Serg. Sam. Hikcox, Apr. 16, 
1696. [He d. about 1718; she, 1750]. 

1. Hannah, b. Febrary 2, 1696 [bap. in Woodbury, 

Nov. 9, 1697], and d. Mch. 12, 1713. 
[Johanna, bap. in Wood., May 21, 1698]. 

2. John, b. in the 28 day of May, 1699. 

3. Samuell, b. in Nov. 6, 1703. 

4. Thomas, b. in Januari 10, 1705; deied in March 

5, 1706. 

5. Thomas, b. in July 10, 1707. 

6. Beniamin, b. in Agust 28, 1710. 

7. Ebenezer, b. Feb. 28, 1713-14. 

John Judd, s. of John, dec'd, m. Marcy 
Brounson, d. of Sam., dec'd, of Ken- 
sington, Jan. 6, 1 731-2, whod. Nov. 13, 
1737. 

I. Jemima, b. Nov. 12, 1732; m. D. Taylor. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



ap79 



JUUD. Jll>I>. 

2. Samuel, b. Dec. 26, 1734. 

3. Noah, b. Oct. 13, 1737. 

John Judd, s. of Sam., m. Elizabeth Rich- 
ards, d. of Eben, Apr. 10, 1755. 

1. Levi, b. Mch 16; d. July 29, 1756. 

2. Levi, b. Oct. 22, 1757. 

3. Abigail, b. July 3; d. July 10, 1760. 

4. John, b. June 27, 1761. 

5. Chandler, b. Apr. 3, 1763. 

6. Abigail, b. Apr. 7, 1765. 

7. Luanny, b. ]\lch. ig, 1769; m. B. Tuttle, 

8. Annah, b. Sept. 26, 1772; m. S. Tuttle. 
g. Esther, b. Feb. 11, 1775. 

Joseph Judd, s. of Thomas of Hart. , dec'd, 
m. Elizabeth Royse [b. Aug., 1709]. '^^• 
of Robert of Wal., Nov. 10, 1726. He 
d. Feb. 16, 1750; she, May 14, 1770. 

1. Isaac, b. Nov. 18, 1727 [in West Hartford]. 

2. Phebe, b. May 10, 1729. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 7, 1732. 

4. Lois, b. June g, 1735; d. Mch. 4, 1750. 

5. Ebenezer, b. Nov. 23, 1737. 

6. Ruth, b. May 23, 1740; m. Abr. Lewis. 

7. Abigail, b. Jan. 23, 1742-3; d. Mch. 23, 1750. 

Julia E. Judd m. J. P. Merriman, 1840. 
Larmon N. Judd, s. of Chauncey, dec'd, 

m. Olive Bouton, d. of John, Oct. 29, 

1826. 
Laura Judd m. Luther Gaylord, 1833. 
Laura Judd m. Nelson Hinman, 1837. 
Loveland Judd, b. May 23, 17SS, s. of 

Walter, and Rebecca Brockett, d. of 

Zenas, m. Apr. 6, 1S12. 

1. Harriet, b. Apr. 23, 1S13. 

2. Amanda, b. June 8; d. Oct. 16, 1S15. 

3. Franklin Lauren, b. Aug. 8, i8i6, 

4. Abigail, b. Feb. iS, iStg; d. Oct. 8, 1838. 

5. Amanda 2d, b. Mch. 13, 1821. 

6. Rebecca, b. Jan. 8, 1823. 

7. Leva, b. Jan. 25, 1826. 

8. Electa, b. June 7, 1829; d. Oct. 6, 1845. 
g. Edson L., b. Apr. g, 1835. 

Lucian Judd, s. of Walter, m. Rachel 
Potter, d. of Lemuel, Oct. 25, 1820. 

Lucy C. Judd m. H. E. Mann, 1837. 
Lydia Judd m. Nathan Hubbard, 1735. 
Mabel Judd m. Sam. Kidney, 1S23. 
Michael Judd [s. of Noah] m. Mary Wei- 
ton [d. of Peter], Apr. 24, 1785.3 

1. Rebecah, b. Mch. 28, 1786. 

2. Michael 2d, b. Mch. 17, 1789. 

Minerva Judd m. Lyman Welton, 1822. 
Myron E. Judd of Winsted m. Jane E. 

Chattield, Apr. 20, 1846. 
Nancy Judd m. Marshall Hoadley, 1S21. 
Noah Judd, s. of Lieut. John, m. Re- 

beckah Prindle, d. of Jon., July 10, 

1760. [He d. Sept. 3, 1822; she, 1S38, 

a. 99]. 

1. Jemima, b. .\ug. lo, 1761 [m. S. Woodward]. 

2. Harvey, b. May 5, 1763. 

3. Michael, b. Feb. ig, 1765 (christened at St. James 

Ch., Apr. 14, 1765. The first, recorded). 

Rebeccah F. Judd m. J. C. Bailey, 1847, 



JuDi). Judd. 

Reuben L. Judd, b. Dec, 1800, s. of Reu- 
ben of Bethany, and Mary Ann Wel- 
ton, b. Sept., 1798, d. of Adrian, m. 
Apr. 26, 1826. She d. Dec. 22, 1837, 
a. 40.'^ 

1. Ellen G., b. June 21, 1S29. 

2. Charles A., b. Dec. 16; 1835. 

Rossel Judd, s. of Isaac, m. Lois Scott, 
June 17, 1777. 

1. Esther, b. June 17, 1778. 

2. Leava, b. Feb. 7, 1780 [m. Rev. Sam. Potter]. 

3. Anna, b. Oct. i, 1782. 

4. Tamer, b. Sept. 22, 1784. 

5. Cloe, b. Sept. i, 1786. 

6. Russel Calvin, b. May 20, I78g. 

7. Lois, b. June 12, 1791; m. J. B. Candee. 

8. Laura, b. July 30, 1794. 
ij. Asahel, b. Aug. 15, 1797. 

Sally Judd m. Benj. Hoadley, iSio. 

Sally M. Judd m. Chas. Welton, 1834. 

Samuel Judd, s. of John, dec'd. m. Eliza- 
beth Scott, d. of David, dec'd, Jan. 13, 
1730-1 [and d. Jan. 30, 1793]- 

1. Hannah, b. Nov. 8, 1731; m. D. Garnsey. 

2. John, b. Aug. 4, 1733. 

3. Asa, b. Sept. 2g, 1726 (1736). 

4. Esther, b. Aug. 11, 1728 (1738); m. J. Stow. 

Samuel Judd, s. of Lieut. John, m. Bede 
Hopkins, cl. of Isaac, Mch. 31, 1763. 
He d. Sept. 11, 1825, a. 90; and she, 
Mch. 20, 1 8 10, a. 73. 

1. Mercy, b. Feb. 20, 1764; m. Timon Miles. 

2. Olive, b. July 21, 1767; d. Nov. 3, i84g. 

3. John, b. Apr. 11; d. Nov. 14, 1769. 

4. Sarah, b. Nov. 18, 1771; m. Israel Holmes. 

5. Hannah, b. June 7, 1774. 

6. Samuel, b. June 5, 1777. 

Samuel Judd, s. of Capt. Sam., m. Cleora 
Baldwm, d. of Benjamin, Aug. 30, 

1798. 

1. Elizabeth Cook, b. Aug. 23, 1800. 

2. Sophia Hopkins, b. Aug. 6, 1803; d. Aug. 25, 

1815. 

Cleora d. Dec. 9, 1809, and Samuel m. 
Polly Beecher, d. of Jesse of W'bridge, 
Apr. 5, 1S12. He d. Mch. 19, 1813; 
she, Aug. 30, 1S15, a. 32. 

Samuel M. Judd, s. of Thomas, m. Har- 
riet E. Smith, d. of Lemuel of Bethany, 
June 28, 1840. 

1. Eldridge Franklin, b. Apr. 15, 1841. 

2. Thomas Wilson, b. Sept. 5, 1844. 

Sarah B. Judd m. Lucien Cook, 1838. 
Stephen Judd, s. of William, m. Margery 
Clark, d. of Caleb, May 31, 1743. 

I. Thonias, b. Feb. 9, 1743-4. 
^^ 2. Lidda, b. Sept. 18, 1745; m. Justice Daily; her 
first child, Jonathan, b. Jan. 28, 1763. 

Margery d. Feb. 11, 1746-7, and Stephen 
m. Mary Whealer, d. of Thomas of 
Woodbury, dec'd, Apr. 28, 174S. 

3. Daniel, b. May 9; d. Aug. 8, 1749. 

Mary d. Aug. 11, 1749, and Stephen, s. 
of Capt. Wm. of Woodbury, m. Lydia 



80 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



JCDD. JlDD. 

Woorner, d. of Doct. Ebenezer of 
Wood., Mch. 13, 1751. 

4. Daniel, b. Jan. 17, 1751-2; d. at Quebec with 

the small-pox, Feb. 2, 1776. 

5. Hannah, b. Oct. 3, 1753. 

6. Freeman, b. Aug. 10, 1755. 

7. Stephen, b. May i, 1757. < 

8. Margret, b. Jan. 23, 1759. 

9. Eben Warner, b. Apr. 12, 1761. 

^ Lydia d. June 2, 176S, and Stephen m. 
his fourth wife, viz., Else Matthews, 
Rehck of Phineas, Nov. 10, 1768. He 
d. Oct. 12, 1777 [she, Aug. 2, 1799]. 

in. Erastus, b. June 29, 1771. 

Stephen Judd, Jr., s. of Hepsibah, m. 
Sarah Russell, d. of Wm. of Walling- 
ford, Jan. 18, 1776. He d. July 10, 
1S20; she, Mch. 16, 1S42, a. 83.-' 

1. Thomas, b. Oct. 28, 1776. 

2. Stephen, b. Jan. 29, 1780. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Feb. 20, 1782; m. J. S. Tuttle; her 

d., JVIary Monson, m. W. Perkins. 

4. Hepsibah, b. May 23, 1784. 

5. Jesse, b. Oct. 11, 1786. 

6. Nabby Curtiss, b. Apr. 10, 1791. 

7. Sally Russel b. Xov. i, 1793; d. Oct., 1794. 

8. Sarah Ann, b. Aug. 18, 1795. 

9. Harvey, b. Aug. 25, 1708. 

10. William Russel, b. May 9, 1802. 

Left. Thomas Judd's dau., .Sarah [w. of 
Step. Hopkins, Jr., of Hart.], d. ]\Iay 

11, 1693, a. 27. His wife d. May 22, 
1695, a. 56. Left. Judd d. Jan. 10, 
1702-3, a. 64. 

Deacon Thomas judd, ye soon of Will- 
iam of farming town was married to 
Sarah freeman, ye daughter of Stephen 
freeman of New worck in east iarsy 
february ye 9, 1687. 

May I. William, b. May 7, 1689. 

2. Martha, b. Sept. 11, 1692 [m. T. Cowles]. 

7 3. Rachell, b. Nov. 13, 1694; m. Thomas Upson. 

4. Sarah, b. Apr. 23, 1697 [d. Nov. 3, 1726J. 

1703. 5- Hannah, b. July 22, 1699; d. Mch. 12, 1713. 

6. Mary, b. Jan. 30, 1701; m. Tim. Hopkms. 

1705. 7. Elizabeth, b. July 23, 1704; m. J. Upson. 
1709. 8. Ruth, b. May 9, 1707 [m. Jas. Smith]. 

1709. 9. Steven, b. Nov. 30, 1709; d. June 25, 1715. 

Thomas Judd, soon of left. Thomas was 
married to Sarah Gaylard [b. in Wind- 
sor, July II, 1671], dau. of Joseph 
Senor, ye nth of Aprill 1688; married 
by Mr. ZaC: Walker. [He d. in West 
Hartford, 1724] 

Ye first born of sd Judd whose name was thomas 

was born March 28 in ye year 1690. 
Ye 2 : Joseph and : 3 : Sarah was born ye 2 of 

febeary 1692-3 [m. James Williams]; Joseph 

dyed loth same month. 
Ye 4 Elizabeth was born ye 18 of Octobr 1695 

[m. Joshua How] . 
Ye 5 ioannah waf born ye 12 Sept. in 1698 : ra. 

William Scott. 
Ye : 6 a foon.Jofeph : waf born ye 21 Aprill, 

1701 : 

Ye : 7 a soon Ebenezer was horn ye 30 March : 
1702-3 : 

8. a daughter Mary born 2 of Aprill-1706 [m. 

Samuel Moss]. 

9. a daughter Rachell born 4 of October, 1708. 



JlDD. JUDSON. 

Thomas Judd, s. of John, dec'd, m. Ann 
Porter, d. of Dan., dec'd. May it. 1732. 
[Hed. 1740] and Ann m. James Nichols. 

1. Michael, b. Sept. 7, 1733; d. Oct. 8, 1734. 

2. Michael, b. Aug. 24, 1735 [d. 1750]. 

3. Susanna, b. Jan. 23, 1737-8; m. Ezra Bronson. 

Thomas Judd, s of Stephen, m. Betsey 
Clark from Wallingford, Oct. 24, 1800. 

1. Henry Clark, b. Oct. g, 1801. 

2. Susan Atkins, b. Mch. 24, 1S03; m. Jesse Lam- 

bert and Luther Higgins. 

3. Lydia Ann, b. June 2, 1805, in Wal., m. Orson 

Smith, 1826. y 

4. Sally, b. Aug. iQ, 1807, in N. Haven. 

5. Hep'sa Eliz., b. May 28, 1809; m. C. Sanford. 

6. Samuel Miles, b. 51ay i, i8ig. 

7. Daniel, b. Aug. 6, 1821. 

8. Stephen, b. Feb. 4, 1823. 

Timothy Judd, s. of Wm., m. Mary Clark, 
d. of Thomas, Mch. 29, 1744. She d. 
Nov. 8, 1744, and Timothy m. jMillicent 
Southmayd, wid. of John, Jr., Oct. 9, 
1749. 

1. Mary, b. Dec. 11, 1751; m. Levi Andrus. 

2. Parthenia, b. Aug. 6, 1754; m. A. Skilton. 

3. AUyn Southmayd, b. Tuesday, Oct. 5, 1756. 

4. Giles, b. Mon., Oct. 30, 1758; d. Oct. 3, 1759. 

5. Millicent, b. Thurs., Aug. 21, 1760; d. Aug. 30, 

1762. 

6. Timothy, b. Friday, Jan. 21; d. May 26, 1763. 

]\Iillicent d. Mch. 26, 1763, and Timothy 
m. Ann Sedgwick [wid. of Benj.] Aug. 
8. 1764. Timothy m. [his fourth wife, 
widow] ]Mary Classon, July 4, 1783.^ 

Walter Judd, s. of Isaac, m. Margaret 
Tirrell, d. of Josiah, May 30, 1782. 

William Judd, s. of Deac, Thomas, ajid 
Mary [Root, d. of Stephen of Farm., 
m. Jan. 21, 1712-13. She d. Dec. 11, 
1751. He m. wid. ;Hope Lee, and d. 
Jan. 29, 1772]: 

1. Timothy, b. Dec. 28, 1713. '^ 

2. Stephen, b. Aug. 17, 1715. •»- 

3. Hannah, b. Sept. 12, 1717. 

4. Jonathan, b. Oct. 4, 1719 [Minister at North- 

ampton, si.\ty years; d. 1803]. 

5. A dau. [b. and d. 1722]. 

6. Elnathan, b. Aug. 7, 1724. 

7. Mary, b. Nov. 22, 1727 [m. Thomas Richards]. 

8. William, b. Jan. 12, 1729-30. 

9. Sarah, b. Nov. 20, 1732; m. B. Richards. 

William Judd, s. of Capt. Wm., m. Mary 
Castle, d. of Isaac, Nov. 2, 1752. 

1. Demas, b. May 26, 1753. 

2. Batineryhn (Balmarine ?), b. Sept. 20, 1755. 

3. William, b. Apr. i, 1758. "V 

4. Mary Root, b. Dec. 21, 1759 [m. D. Garnsey]. ^ 

5. Luce, b. July 2, 1764 [m. Isaac Garnsey]. 

6. Sheldon, b. July 18, 1767; d. June 3, 1768. 

7. Sheldon, b. Oct. 17, 1768. 
S. Parthena, b. Dec. 3, 1771. 

William R. Judd, s. of Stephen, m. Dec. 
2, 1 32 1, Anna Brown, d. of Curtis, b. 
Aug. 8, 1804. 

1. Chauncey W., b. June 27, 1824. 

2. Henrietta, b. Dec. 12, 1831. 

Burritt Judson, s. of Joseph R. of Wood- 
bury, m. Roxana Warner, d. of Obad., 
Sept. 17, 1829. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP81 



JuDsox. Kelly. 

Caroline Warner Fenn, d. of Nathan of New 
Haven, an adopted child of B. Judson, b. Mch. 
27, 1846. 

[Harlow Judson, b. Dec. 12, 1797, and 
vSallv Prentiss, b. Feb. 19, 179S, m. 
Sept. S, 1S25. 

Susan L., b. July 16, 1S27; ni. Burr Calhoun, 

May 22, 1848. 
Mary E., b. Apr. 17, 1S30. 
Albert S., b. Aug. 27, 18^2. 
Henry W., b. Mch. 16, 1839.] 

Martha Judson m. Ashley Scott, 1787. 
Rebeckah Judson m. Rev. Abr. Fowler, 

1795- 
Simeon Judson:^ 

Patty, b. at Wood., Sept. 23, 1778. 

Thomas Juris m. Mary Brown, ]Mch. 12, 

1837- 
Joseph Kain m. Ann W. Bateman, Sept. 

3, 1838. 
William Kanah m. Bridget Gold, Aug. 

9. 1851. 
Peter Kavenaugh ni. Margaret Cumford 

in Ireland. 

1. Allis (Alice), b. Mch., 1833. 

2. Martin, b. Apr., 1835. 

3. Mary Jane, b. Apr., 1837. 

4. Margarett, b. Mch. 19, 1838. 

Martha Keeler m. David vScott, 1800. 
Anna Kellogg m. Jer. Grilley, 1S12. 
Edmund Kellogg of Wolcott m. Betsey 

Pond, Sept. 23, 1S21. 
Martin Kellogg'* [and Olive]: 

Tabitha, b. Jan. 10, 1767. 
Martin, b. Jiine 6, 1768. 
Joseph, b. Feb. 19, 1770. 
Edward, b. May 16, 1772. 
Samuel, b. May 10, 1774. 
Olive, b. Feb. 15, 1776. 
Moses, b. June 16, 1778. 
Daniel, b. July 16, 1780. 
David, b. Apr. 12, 17S3. 
Abigail, b. Jan. 5, 1789. 

James Kelly m. Alice Egan, Apr. 29, 

iS5i.» 
John Kelly m. Julia Butler (?), May 4, 

1851.^ 
John Kelly m. Anastasia Murphy, Aug. 

iS, iS5i.« 
Patrick Kelly m. Marv Moore, Apr. 29, 

1S51.* 
Jonathan Kelcy, s. of Stephen of Weth. 

[and Dorothy Bronson, d. of John] m. 

Ruth Scott, d. of David, Nov. 7, 172S. 

1. Nathan, b. Oct. 29, 1729. 

2. Lois, b. July 20, 1731. 

3. Martha, b. Aug. 13, 1733; m. Josiah Welton. 

4. Esaias, b. Sept. 8, 1735. 

Stephen Kelly (Kelsey), s. of Stephen of 
Wetherstield, m. Esther Hikcox, d. of 
Eben., Aug. 23, 1733. 

1. Daniell, b. Sept. 23, 1734. 

2. Stephen, b. Dec. 2, 1736. 



Kelly. Kingsbury. 

3. Esther, b. Aug. 9, 1739. 

4. Hannah, b. Sept. 7, 1741. 

5. David, b. Apr. 23, 1744. 

6. Reuben, b. June 7, 1746. 

Green Kendrick from N. Carolina m. 
Anna Maria Leavenworth, d. of Mark 
[at Augusta, Ga.], June 12, 1S23. 

1. John, b. May 27, 1825. 

2. Catharine, b. Aug. 13, 1827. 

3. Martha, b. Sept. 21, 1829. 

James Kennedy, b. 1817, and Jane Mo- 
ran, b. 1S19 — both from Ire. — m. in N. 
H., June, 1844. 

I. Ann, b. Dec, 1S44. 

Samuel Kidney of Litchfield m. Mabel 
Judd, June 22, 1S23. 

Jeremiah Kilborn, b. July 12, 1821, and 
Rachel Westover, b. Jan. 11, 1S24 — both 
from Litchfield — m. Mch. 14, 1844. 

I. David P., b. June 27, 1845. 

Laura Kilborn m. Otis T. Peck, 1830. 
James Kilduff m. Ellen McGuinniss, May 
I, 184S. 

Thomas Kilduff m. Bridget Hoffren in 

Ireland, Aj^r., 1S39. 

1. John, b. in Ire., May 21, 1840. 

2. Edward, b. Apr. 17, 1843. 

3. James, b. Nov. 15, 1844. 

4. Maria, b. Feb. 23, 1847. 

Timothy Kilduff m. Maria Loughlan, 

vSept. 19, 1S51. 

Daniell Killum, s. of Daniel of New 
Haven, m. vSusanna Porter, d. of Dr. 
Daniel, July 4, 1758, and d. May 15, 1760. 

I. Daniell, b. Feb. 21, 1759; d. Apr. 6, 1777, and his 
mother, who had m. John Cossett, d. the same 
day. 

Lavinia Kimball m. Albert Nichols, 1833. 
Merritt Kimball m. LydiaA. Smith, Dec. 

22[iS33]. 
Charity Kimberly m. Wm. Matthews, 

1788. 

Susanna Kimberly m. J. S. Merriam, 
1783. 

George King, b. Feb. 7, 1810, s. of Mat- 
thew of Harwinton, and Mahala Nich- 
ols, b. Feb., 1S17, d. of Gideon, m. 
Aug., 1839. 

1. Franklin, b. June, 1840. 

2. Charlotte, b. Mch., 1845. 

Charles D. Kingsbury m. Liza Leaven- 
worth [d. of Dr. Frederick], Mch. 5, 
1821. 

1. Frederick John, b. Jan. i, 1823. 

2. Sarah Leavenworth, b. Apr. i, 1840. 

Eliza, d. Nov. 16, 1852, and Charles m. 
Rebecca Hotchkiss [d. of Elijah] in 
Plainfield, N. J., Nov. 24, 1859. She d. 
Dec. 7, 1S73. 

Frederick J. Kingsbury [s. of Charles 



85 Ap 



BISTORT OF WATERBURT. 



KiNcsi'.i Kv. Lank. 

D.J m. Alathea R. Scovill [d. of Will- 
iam H.J, Apr. 29, 1851. 

John Kingsbury [b. Dec. 30, 1762], s. of 
Nathl., dec'd, of Norwich, m. Marcia 
Bronson, d. of Stephen, Nov. 6, 1704- 
She d. Mch. 21, 1S13. 

1. Charles Dennison, b. Nov. 7, 1795. 

2. Julius Jesse Brouson, b. Oct. 18, 1797. 

3. John Southmayd, b. Nov. 18, 1801. 

4. Sarah Susanna, b. Nov. 26, 1807; m. Wm. Brown. 

John S. Kingsbury, s. of John, Esq., m. 
Abby H. Haydcn, d. of Daniel, Jan. 
25, 1S27. 

1. James D., b. Nov. 22, 1S27. 

2. (jeorge B., b. Sept. 6, 1829. 

3. Marcia A., b. May i, 1832'. 

4. Sylvia E., b. Sept. 7, 1834. 

5. James D., b. Sept. 7, 1836; d. Jan. 19, 1837. 

6. Harriet A. b. June 15, 1839. 

7. Abbv S., b. June 20, 1842. 

8. John S. D., b. July 27, 1845. 

Ann Eliza Kinkham m. C. M. Johnson, 

1847. 
Reuben Kinney of N. H. d. Aug. i, 1S06, 

a. 27.^ 
Sophia Kinney m. Horace Stevens, 1S36. 
William H. Kirk, b. in Paisley, Scot., 

July 27, iSiS, and Julia M. Frost, d. of 

S. C., m. Sept. I, 1845. 

I. William Ferdinand, b. May 19, 1S46. 

Eliza Kirtland m. N. B. Piatt, 1S40. 
Betsey Knowlton m. Wm. Johnson, 1841. 
Sarah Knowlton m. Jesse Perkins, and 

J. Bronson. 
Martin Lacy m. oMargaret W^hite, May 

10, 1851. 

William Laird, b. in Paisle\% Scot., Jan. 
13, 1820, and Mary Ann Kittridge Taj'- 
lor, b. in Groton, Aug. 12, 1821, m. 
Mch. 24, 1S43. 

I. William Henry Claudius, b. Nov. 4, 1S45; d. June 
3- 1847. 

Michael Lally m. Bridget Horan, Anr. 8, 

1851.** 
Patrick Lally m. Mary Kelly, Sept. 15, 

1851.^ 
Jesse Lambert of New Haven m. vSusan 

Judd, Jan. 7, 1822. He d. and Susan 

m. L. Higgins, 1829. 

I. Eliza, b. Dec, 1S23; m. Jared Frost. 

Althea Lampson m. James Scovill, 178S. 

Edward R. Lampson m. Esther Strong, 
June 30, 1851. 

Anson E. Lane of Wolcott m. Lvdia A. 
Wclton, June 18, 1828. 

Edwin S. Lane m. Caroline Warner, 
Nov. 24, 1839. [He d. 1842J and Caro- 
line m. Nathan Fenn, 1844. 

Joel Lane, s. of Daniel, m. Elizabeth 
Atkins, d. of Jose h, May 22, 1776. 



TvANK. LkACH. 

1. Josiah, b. Mch. 5, 1777. 

2. Mary, b. June 2, 1779. 

Levi Lane and Sukey [HotchkissJ:' 

Edwin Sherman, bap. June 20, 1810. 

Merrit Lane [s. of LeviJ m. Olive Ives 

[d. of Talcott of No. HavenJ, June 9, 

1S45-' 
Joseph Lang from Sandbointon, N. H., 

and Eliza ^IcLallan from Lancaster, 

Mass., m. Feb. 2, 1819. 

1. Mary A., b. Dec. 20, 1819. 

2. Charles, b. Feb. 6, 1823-, d- Aug. 8, 1826. 

3. Susan M., b. Apr. 28,' 1825. 

4. Eliza J., b. Sept. 12, 1827; m. I. A. Mattoon. 
:;. Sarah P., b. Dec. 5, 1829. 

6. Charles B., b. July 7, 1837. 

7. Caroline R., b. May 31, 1843. 

Robert Lang m. Charlotte E. Sperry [d. 

of AnsonJ, Feb. 9, 1851. 
Abigail Landon m. Samne Nichols, 17S3. 
Abigail Langdon m. Andrew Neale, 1S44. 
David Landen, s. of David of Goshen, 

m. Abigail Judd, d. of Ebenezer, Feb. 

4, 1789. 

I. Fanny, b. July i, 1791. 

Martha Langdon m. J. P. Benham, 1847. 
Ozias Langdon m. Abigail Hall, May 13, 

1832. 
Sarah A, Langdon m. Jere. Grilley, 1844. 
Susanna Langton m. Eben. Bronson, 

1736. 
William Langdon m. ]\Iary Thompson 

in England. 

1. Theresa, b. June 11, 1829. 

2. Eliza, b. Apr., 1831; m. J. Redfern. 

3. Mary Ann, b. Apr. 3, 1833. 

4. Sarah Ann, b. Sept- 23, 1838. 

5. William Henry, b. May 11, 1840. 

6. Charles, b. Mch. 21, 1842. (All these b. in Eng.) 

7. Elmore, b. Jan. i, 1845. 

Thomas Lannen m. Mary Reiley, May 
14, 1S51.8 

Rachel Lattimore m. S. Guernsey, 1764. 
Michael Laughlin of Kings Co.. Ire., m. 
Mary Down, in Ire., July, 1837. 

1. Edward, b. Sept. 9, 1838. 

2. Kill, b. Sept. 9, 1844. 

3. Ann, b. May 20, 1S46. (All born in America.) 

David S. Law from Windham, Green 
Co., N. Y. (or Barnwell, S. C), m. 
Adelia Porter, d. of Dr. Jesse, July 9, 
iS37- 
I. Jesse Leonadas, b. Oct. 6, 1840. 

Mary Law m. J. B. Johnson, 1850. 
Charles B. Lawrence m. Lj-dia A. John 

ston, Sept. 22, 1847. 
George Law^rence m. Mary Allen of 

Nau., May 14, 184S. 
William C. Lawrence of Canaan m. 

Maria T. Odle of Litch., Apr. iS, 1S36. 
Lucinda Leach m. George Nichols, 1S46. 



Pa MILT RECORDS. 



AP83 



Leave.wvortu. Leavenworth. 

Benjamin F. Leavenworth [s. of Mark] 
m. ]M^e Bartholomew [d. of Andrew] 
of New Haven, Nov. 12, 1-S33. 

Boardman H. Leavenworth, b. Jan. 16. 
1826, s. of Russell of Woodbury, and 
Antoinette Merriam, b. in 1S28, d. of 
Rufus of Prospect, m. Sept. 25, 1846. 

I. Ellen Antoinette, b. June 27, 1847. 

Edward B. Leavenworth, s. of Philo of 
Roxbury, m. Candice C. Brown, d. of 
Abner [Sept. 28, 1840]. 

I. Mary Maria, b. July 26, 1S46. 

Elisha Leavenworth [s. of Dr. Fred- 
erick] m. Cynthia Fuller, Sept. 17, 
1S45. 

Dr. Frederick Leavenworth, s. of Jesse, 
Esq., of Vermont, m. Fanny Johnson, 
d. of Abner, A.M., May 19, 1796. 

1. Lucia, b. Mch. 24, 1797; m. Asa Train. 

2. Liza, b. Dec. 17, 1798; m. C. D. Kingsbury. 

3. Frederick Augustus, b. June 13, 1801 [d. 1809]. 

4. Abner Johnson, b. July 2, 1803. 

[5. FannyA., b. June i, 1812; m. N. S. Worden. 
6. Elisha, b. Mch. 15, 1814.] 

Hannah Leavenworth m. David Bald- 
win, 1800. 

Jesse Leavenworth s. of Rev. Mr. Mark, 
m. Catharine Frisbie, relict of Mr. Cul- 
pepper, late of Branford, and d. of Mr. 
John Conkling of South Hampton on 
Long Island, July i, 1761. [She d. 
June 29, 1824, a. 87.] 

1. Melines Conkling, b. May 4, 1762. 

2. Ruth, b. Feb. 25, 1764. 

3. Frederick, b. Sept. 14, 1766. 
[4. Catharine, b. 1769. 

5. Jesse, b. Aug., 1771. 

6. Mark, b. in New Haven, .-Vug. 30, 1774. 1 

Joseph Leavenworth, b. Sept. i6, 1773, 
s. of Samuel, and Tamar Prichard, b. 
Feb. 9, 1778, d. of Benjamin, m. Jan. 
12, 1797. 

1. Harriet, b. Nov. ig, 1798 [ni. Win. Lockwood]. 

2. Hannah, b. Sept. 16, 1800; m. Lyman Bradley. 

3. Joseph Stanley, b. Dec. 2, 1802; d. Dec. 28, 1841. 

4. Samuel Eli, b. Aug. 11, 1805; d. Feb. 20, 1814. 

5. Rebecca, b. Feb. q, 1811; m. W. R. Hotchkiss. 

6. Mary Gaines, b. Sept. 6, 1S14; in. Wm. Newton. 

7. Sarah Ann, b. Aug. 9, 1817; 111. J. Wheeler. 

Joseph S. Leavenworth m. Minerva 
Newton, Apr. 29, 1S24, and d. Dec. 30, 
1841, a. 39. Minerva m. J. G. Bronson. 

1. Joseph N., b. Mch. 24, 1824. 

2. Julia Martha, b. May 27, 1S27; ni. E. B. Fair- 

child. 

3. Frederic C, b. July 14, 1S35. 

(" Baldwin Genealogy " gives 

Joseph, b. 1828; Martha, 1830; Frederick Eli, 
July 21, 1833, and F. C. as above.) 

Mr. Mark Leavenworth, s. of Thomas 



Leavenworth. Lewis. 

of Stratford, m. Afrs. Ruth Peck, d. of 
Mr. Jeremiah, Feb. 6, 1739-40. 

1. Jesse, b. Nov. 20, 1740. 

Ruth d. Aug. 8, 1750 and Mark m. 
Sarah Hull, d. of Capt. Joseph of 
Derby, Dec. 4, 1750. He d. Aug. 20, 
1797, in the 86th year of his age and 
58th of his ministry. She d. May 7, 
1808, a. 82 yrs. 

2. Mark, b. May 26, 1752 [d. in Paris, 1812.] 

3. Joseph, b. Jan. ig, 1755; d. Jan. 6, 1756. 

4. Sarah, b. Dec. 11, 1756; in. Dr. Isaac Baldwin. 

5. William, b. Feb. 23, 1759. 

6. Nathan, b. Dec. ii, 1761 [grad. at Yale, 1778]; 

d. Jun. 9, 1799. 

7. Joseph, b. June 15, 1764. 

8. Elisha, b. Oct. 15, 1766. 

Mark Leavenworth, s. of Jesse, m. An- 
na Cook, d. of Moses, 1795. 

1. Melines Conkling, b. Jan 15, I7g6. 

2. Anna Maria, b. Feb. 10, I7g8; m. Green Ken- 

drick. 

3. Mark Mortimer, b. May 13, 1800; d. in Middle- 

town, July 22, 1825 [of spotted fever]. 

4. Benjamin Franklin, b. July 27, 1S03. 

5. Harriet Henrietta, b. May 20, 1810; d. Mch. 24, 

1S33. 
7. Catharine E., b. Aug. i, 1S16; m. C. S. Sperry. 

Anna d. Apr. 9, 1842, and Mark m. Su- 
san L. Cook, d. of Joseph, Oct. 27, 

1S44. 

Noble Leavenworth from Goshen, b. 
May 5, 1824, m. Aug. is, 1842, Louise 
E. Davis, b. Nov. 12, 1824, d. of Ed- 
ward E. of Watertown. 

Frederick 'J'heodorc, b. Sept. 29, 1844. 

Sally Leavenworth m. H. W. Baird, 

iSio. 

Sarah H. Leavenworth m. B. P. Wat- 

rous, 1839. 

William Leavenworth, s. of Rev. ]\Iark, 
m, Hannah Bronson, d. of Ezra, May 

I, 1781. 

1. Sally, b. June 20, 1784 [m. Joel Walter]. 

2. William, b. June 20, 1786 [in. Fanny Porter, d. 

of Abel].* 

David W. Lee of Middletown m. Mary 

Jiihnson, Feb. 23, 1823. 
Mary Lee m. Stephen Upson, 1682. 
Lucretia Leete m. W. A. Peck, 1830. 
Charles Leonard d. Oct. 6, 1S41, a. 51.- 
Maria Leonard m. Henry Boakes, 1836. 
Mary Leonard m. A. D. Bacon, 1843. 
Agnes Leveston m. Sam. Smith, 1770. 
■[[Abner Lewis, b. in Woodbury, Aug. 21, 

1741, s. of Caleb of Wallingford, m. 

Azubah Williams, d. of Daniel]. 

I. Asahel, b. Oct. 3, 1762. 

Abraham Lewis, s. of Joseph, m. Ruth 



* For more extended notices of these families, see " Leavenworth Genealogy." 
t The record says "Jacob and Azubah," which is manifestly an error. 



84 AP 



HISTORY OF WATEBBURY. 



Lewis. Lkwis. 

Judd, d. of Joseph, Nov. 9, 1767, who 
d. Apr. 20, 1S14. 

1. Rhoda, b. June 6, 1769 [d. unm. Mch., 1832]. 

2. Ansel, b.Jiily 18, 1772. 

3. Phebe, b. July 17, 1775. 

4. PoUe, b. Aug. 30, 1778. 

5. Susanna, b. July 20, 1782. 

Ansel Lewis, s. of Abraham, m. Lydia 
Merrills, d. of Caleb, Mav iS, 1S02. 
She d. Oct. I, 1S20. 

1. Lydia Candee, b. Feb. 28, 1803 [m. K. Brad- 

ley]. 

2. Ruth Judd, b. May 28, 1804. 

3. Phebe, b. Aug. 15, 1805; m. Jon. Bradley. 

4. Samuel, b. Sept. i, 1806. 

5. Ansel Spencer, b. Oct. 9, 1807. 

6. Rachel, b. Sept. 30, 1809; m. E. A. Smith. 

7. Polly, b. May 25, 1811. 

8. Caleb Merrill, b. Feb. 15, 1813; d. Oct., 1818. 

9. Lyman, b. Jan. 4, 1815. 

10. Thomas Warner, b. May 12, 1816. 

11. George, b. Mch. 10, 1818. 

Archibald P. Lewis of Antwerp, N. Y., 

m. Elizabeth L. Potter [d. of Erastv;s], 

Sept. 27, 1S4C). 
Asahel H. Lewis m. Harriet N. Hortim, 

Nov. 3, 1841. 
Barnabas Lewis, s. of [Dr.] Benjamin of 

Wallingford, m. Jerusha Doolittle, d. of 

Ebenezer, Mch. lo, 1752. 

1. A son, b. and d. June 7, 1752. 

2. Benoni, b. Apr. 30, 1754. 

Jerusha d. May 24, 1754, and Barnabas 
m. Deborah Brooks, d. of Thomas of 
Wal., Dec. 15, 1756. She d. Feb. 11, 
1759- 

3. David, b. Apr. 29, 1757. 

Bela Lewis, s. of Benjamin, m. Damaras 
Prindle, d. of Jonathan — all of Wal- 
lingford — May 15, 1760. He d. May 
15, 1763; and May 15, 1764, Damaras 
m. Oliver Terrill. 

[His heirs were Sarah, Abigail, who chose Dr. 
Henj. Lewis for guardian, Ruth and Naomi]. 

[Caleb Lewis, s. of Caleb of Wal., m. 

Eunice Welton, d. of Stephen, Jan. 10, 

i7:/>.J 
Caleb Lues [s. of Caleb] :- 

Abigail, bap. June 2, 1771. l ^"'''PLew^ ^^'""^ 
^"""^^= f Abigail Lewis. 

[David Lewis s. of John: 

Sylvester. Martha. Rosetta, b. Apr. 3, 1779; 
m. Jan. i, 1800, Amos Whitney. David. Ches- 
ter. Lsaac. Betsey. Sylvia. Joseph. John. 
Hannah. Warren]. 

David Lewis [s. of David] m. Almira 
Calkins [d. of Roswell], Mch. 27, 1803.^ 

Elisha Lewis, s. of Joseph, Jr., dec'd, m. 
Tamer Hale, d. of Sam., of New Ha- 
ven, June 14, 1750. 

1. Isabel, b. Sept. 10, 1751; m. Samuel Scott. 

2. Tamer, b. Dec. 28, 1752. 

3. Barzilla, b. Mch. 28, 1754. 

4. Naboth, b. June 24, 1756. 



Lewis. Lewis. 

Erastus Lewis and Salome:' 

Edward, Mary, Adeline, Julian. Erastus Bouton, 
George and Eliza Salome, bap. Oct. 5, 1817. 

[Ezra Lew^is and Anne Hine, b. Nov. 20, 
1769, d. of Hezekiah, m. Nov. 11, 1790. 

1. Selden, b. Aug. 15, 1791. 

2. Eunice H., b. Jan. 18, 1796; m. \Ym. Mitchell.] 

Garry Lewis m. Mary Hall, Nov. 27, 

IS 23. 

Henrietta Lewis m. O. M. Stevens, 1S26. 

[Isaac Booth Lewis, s. of Rev. Thomas 
of iJeac. Joseph, m. Miliscent Baldwin, 
d. of Jonathan, May 28, 1770. 

1. Polly, b. May 22, 1771; m. Daniel Clark. 

2. Miliscent, b. Oct. 29, 1773; m. David Taylor. 

3. Hannah, b. Apr. 8, 1776; d. Aug. 23, 1777. 

Isaac Booth d. Apr. 29, 1777], and Mil- 
iscent m. Phineas Porter. 

Ives Lewis m. Almira Hall, Nov. 20, 

1S3S. 

Jacob Lewis sec Caleb Lewis. 
John Lewis, s. of Joseph, m. ]Mary 
^lunn, d. of Samuel of Woodbury, Dec. 

4. 1734- 

I. David, b. Apr. 4, 1736; d. Mch. 25, 1754. 
1. John, b. Dec. 10, 1740. 

3. Sarah, b. Apr. 9, 1743; m. Ebenezer Hoadley. 

Mary d. Sept. 30, 1749, and John m. 
Ame Smith, d. of Capt. Samuel of New 
Haven, May 29, 1750. [He d. Feb. 24, 
1799; she, Sept. 26, 1796, a. 76.] 

4. Ame, b. May 24, 1751 [m. Silas Constant]. 

5. Samuel Smith, b. Sept. 7, 1753. 

6. David, b. Apr. 11, 1756. 

John Lewis, s. of John, m. Sarah Gor- 
den, d. of James, dec'd, Nov. 17, 1763. 
Esq. John d. Mch. 5, 1812.* 

1. Anna, b. Jan. 5, 1765; m. Asahel Chittenden. 

2. Ezra, b. May 28, 1768. 

3. Leava, b. July 25, 1770- m. Dr. Dan. Beckley. 

4. John, b. July 16. 1772 [m. Elizabeth Thompson. 

5. Sarah, b. Aug. 18, 1775; m. N. Sherwood. 

6. Chauncey. b. Jan. 16, 1779; m. Hannah Terrill. 

7. Alanson, b. Dec. 8, 1788; d. 1813, unm.] 

Joseph Lewis [s. of Joseph of Simsbury 
(who m. Elizabeth Case, Apr. 30, 1674), 
s. of John and Sarah of Sandwich, 
Eng., wlio came in the ship Hercules, 
1635] m. Sarah Andrus, d. of Abraham, 
Sr., Apr. 7, 1703. 

1. A dau., b. Aug. 12; d. Sept. 7, 1704. 

2. Joseph, b. July 12, 1705. 

3. Sarah, b. Apr. 29, 1708; m. Obadiah Warner. 

4. John, b. Apr. 14, 1711. 

5. Mary, b. June 10, 1714; m. Daniel Williams. 

6. [Kev.] Thomas, b. Aug. 6, 1716 [m. Joanna 

Booth; d. in ^lendham, N. J., Aug. 20, 1777]. 

7. Samuell, b. July 6, 1718. 

8. Abram, b. Feb. i, 1720 [d. Dec, 1740]. 

Joseph Lewds the first dyed Nov. 29, 
1749. Sarah m. Isaac Bronson, 1750, 
who d. 1751, and she, Mch. 6, 1773. 
(Her death, as Sarah, wife of Joseph 
Lewis, is recorded with this, of Joseph.) 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP85 



Lewis. Lewis. 

Joseph Lewis, s. of Joseph, m. Mary 

Slaughter, d. of John of Sinisbury, 

Nov. 12, 1727. 

1. Elisha, b. Jan. 30, 172S-9. 

2. Elemuel, b. Feb. 18, 1730-1. 

3. Damaras, b. Aug. 22, 1734; m. Sam. Scott. 

4. Joseph, b. Oct. 16, 1736. 
[5. Abraham; m. Ruth Judd. 

6. Rodah, bap. Mch. 22, 1749;'' d. May 2, 1767. 

Mary d. Apr. 4, 173S, and Joseph m. 

Nov., 173S, EHzabeth , who, in 

1754, was wife of Roger Terrill (_)f 
Woodbury.] Joseph Lewis ///,? _fifs/ 
d. Oct. 22, 1749. 

Laura Lewis ni. Selden Russell, 1S21. 

Lawrence Sterne Lewis m. Nancy L. 
Hull [adopted dau. of Selden and Sla 
tira Woodruff], Feb. 12, 1835. 

Lucian F. Lewis of Salem m. Susan 
Hitchcock of Southington, Apr. 17, 
iS37- 

[Milo Lewis m. Susan Beecher, d. of 
Daniel, 1810. 

1. Mary, b. 1811; m. Abr. T. Beecher. 

2. Thomas, b. ; m. EHza Warner. 

3. Samuel J., b. June 11, 1817. 

4. William B., b. Aug. 19, 1819. 

5. Caroline, b. Sept. 17, 1821; ra. John Merriman. 

6. fieorge, b. Sept. i, 1823. 

7. Jane Elizabeth, b. Jan. 9, 1826.] 

Molly Lewis m. Josiah Terrill, 1791. 
Moses Lewis and Betsey :- 

Charlotte Ann, bap. Apr. 5, 1S33. 

Rachel Lewis m. E. A. Smith, 1835. 
Reuben Lewis d. ^Ich. 29, 1S36, a 64. 
Samuel Lewis and Reliance:- 

6. John, b. July 26, 1737. 

[Samuel Lewis, b. in Barnstable in 
1700, and his wife, Reliance, had Su- 
sanna, Nehemiah, Samuel, Leonard, 
Solomon and Barnabas, b. in Barn- 
stable, 1722- 1734.] 
Samuel Lewis, s. of Deac. Joseph, m. 
Hannah Rew, d. of Hezekiah, May 19, 
1743- 

1. Abraham, b. Oct. 21, 1744; d. Dec. 6, 1740. 

2. Amzi, b. Oct. 9, 1746. 

3. Olive, b. Dec. 10, 1749. 

4. Luce, b. Mch. 18, 1753 [m. Simeon Porter]. 

5. Mary, b. May 31, 1755; d. Sept. 26, 1759. 

6. Prew, b. Jan. 16, 1759; m. Nathan Porter. 

Hannah d. July i, 1759, and Deac. 
Samuel m. Eunice Beebe, d. of Eph- 
raim of Saj-brook, Nov. 7, 1763. He d. 
Apr. II, 178S; she, May, 1809.= 

7. Hester, b. May 3, 1765 [m. Calvin Spencerl. 

8. MoUe, b. Mch. 9, 1768 [m. Culpepper Hoadley.] 
Q. Samuel, b. June 4, 1770; d. Sept. 19, 1790 [while 
' at Yale] . 

10. Asahel, b. Aug. 3, 1772 [m. Sarah, d. of Josiah 

Atkins and Sarah Rogers] . 

11. Eunice, b. Dec. 12, 1775; m. Ebenezer Fair- 

child, and Elias Scott. 

Samuel Lewis, Jr., b. June i, 1748,-' m. 



Lewis. Loomis. 

Sarah Curtiss, d. of Jotham, Apr. 18, 
1775, — and d. Sept. 19, 1790.'* 

1. Lyman, b. Apr. 15, 1776. 

2. Polly, b. Feb. 2, 1780;-' ni. Zenas Cook. 

3. Curtis, b. May 6, 1786. 

Samuel Smith Lewis m. Abigail Bald- 
win, Feb. 22, 1776. 

1. Thomas, b. Apr. 13, 1777. 

2. Sally, b. Aug. 30, 1781 [m. H. H. Porter]. 
:;. Milo, b. Oct. 22, 1789. 

Samuel J. Lewis [s. of Milo] and Mary 
E. Lewis [b. June 3, 1S18, d. of Edwin 
E., m. Oct. 30, 1839. 

[i. George Albert, b. Feb. 11, 1843.] 

Sarah Lewis m. Samuel Way, 1761. 
Sarah Lewis m. Andrew Hoadley, 1770. 
[Capt. Selden Lewis, s. of Ezra,m. Amelia 
Horton, Nov. 23, 18 14. 

1. Amelia, b. Mch. 31, 1818; d. Sept., 1819. 

2. .Albert, b. Dec. i, 1820. 

3. Burritt, b. July 2, 1823. 

Amelia d. Feb. 23, 1824] and Selden 
m. Lockey Spencer, d. of Deac. Calvin, 
Mch. 13, '1825. 

[4. Amelia, b. Jan. 23. 1826. 

5. James, b. June 6, 1827. 

6. John Edward, b. Dec. 19, 1834.] 

William Lewis m. Patience Scott, May 
I, 1765- 

1. A son, b. Nov 15; d. Nov. 16, 1766. 

2. Joanna, b. Jan. 15, 1767. 

Thomas Lillis m. Honora Haves, Feb. 

28, 1851. 

Harriet Limburner m. A. M. Robe, 1S51. 
Lydia Limburner m. Miles Nichols, 1839. 

Benjamin A. Linsley of Wolcott m. Lu- 

cena Upson of Southington, May 16, 

1S44. 
Charles P. Lindsley of Saratoga m. 

Emilv Dunbar of Plymouth, May 15, 

1843-' 
Anna Lines m. John Mix, 1S34. 
Ebenezer Lines and Amarilla:^ 

Harriet bap. Mch. 13, 1825. 

Joseph W. Lines of Woodbridge m. 
Lydia M. Russell, Oct. 15, 1S25. 

Joseph Lines, s. of Ralph and Lois of 
Bethany, m. Eliza Gaylord, d. of Allan 
and Roxa of Hamden, June, 1831. 

1. Edward Augustus, b. May 19, 1832. 

2. Frances Loueza, b. Feb., 1836. 

Susan Lines m. L. Lounsbury, 1830. 
Abigail Livingstone m. Daniel Seymour, 

1772. 
Ann Lloyd m. N. S. Grennell, 1S47. 
Edmund Lockwood's wife, Susanna, d. 

Nov. 2, 17S7, a. 42.3 
Sarah Loomis m. Lemuel Fancher, 1779.^ 



86 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



Lord. Luddexton. 

[Daniel Lord, s. of Daniel of Lyme, m. 
Hannah Ilumiston, d. of Caleb, Dec. 
25, 1766.] 

Joseph Lothrop, s. of Joseph, m. Mary 
Hartshorn, d. of Jonathan— all of Nor- 
wich—Apr. 17, 1735. 

1. Jonathan John Scndder, b. May 25, 1736. 

2. liarnabas, b. Apr. ig, 1738. 

3. JosL'ph, b. June 9, 1740. 

4. Zebt-diah, b. Dec. 22, 1742. 

5. Mercy, b. May 5, 1745. 

Margaret Lothrop m. Joseph Seymour, 
1764. 

Betsey Lounsbury m. M. R. Andrew, 
1833- 

George Lounsbury of Bethany m. Laura 
Hotchkiss, Nov. 28, 1S44. 

Letson Lounsbury from Bethany m. Su- 
san Lines from Oxford, Apr. 15, 1S30. 

1. Mary, b. in Hiimphreysville, June i, 1830. 

2. Hannah ^[aria, b. in Bethany, Auk. 13, 1833. 

3. David Andrew, b. in Bethany, Jan. 14, 1836. 

4. Betsey Jane, b. Oct. i, 1840. 

Maria Lounsbury m. N. H. Perkins, 
1839. 

Mary Loundsbury m. J. S. Wilson, 1S40. 
Mary Lounsbury m. J. W. Sanford, 1849. 
Wales B. Lounsbury ni. Mary A. Hotch- 
kiss, Mch. 22, 1S46. 

Truman Loveland of Watertown m. 
Eliza Hayden [d. of David], Sept. 7, 

1826. 

Mary Lowere m. Samuel Porter, 1830. 
Nathaniel Lowree, s. of Thomas, m. 

J crush a Newell, d. of James — all of 

Farmington — July 3, 1760. 

I. Chancey, b. Apr. 14, 1761. 

William Davis Luckn (?)of Sim.sbury m. 
Ann Davis, Jan. 28, 1844. 
I Aaron Luddinton, s. of j\Ioses, dec'd, m. 
Sarah Ford, relick of Cephas, and d. of 
John How, Feb. 19, 1761. 

1. Polly, b. Apr. 19, 1762. 

2. Content, b. Apr. 9, 1769. 

I Abraham Ludington, s. of William, m. 
/ Catharine Ehvell, d. of Ebenezer, July 
I 23, 1747, and d. Oct. 20, 175S. 

U I. Ann, b. July 2, 1748. 

2. Asa, b. Mch. 6, 1749-50. 

3. Ruth, b. Feb. 27, 1752. 

4. .Mehittable, b. Sept. 27, 1754; d. Oct. 17, 1756. 

5. Mehittable, b. Nov. 23, 1657. 

Catharine Luddenton m. Jon. Preston, 

1761. 
David Luddenton, s. of !Moses, m. Lois 

Basset, d. of Samuel, dec'd, of New 

Haven, Dec. 4, 1755. 

1. Susannah, b. Jan. 22, 1757. 

2. Lois, b. Nov. II, 1759. 

3. Jotham, b. July 11, 1763. 



Luddenton. Mallerv. 

4. Zera, b. Aug. 11, 1768. 

5. Patience, b. Mch. 27, 1770. 

Elizabeth Luddenton m. Wm. Francher, 

1755- "■ ,j 

James Ludington and Elinor: ^'^•''^"-'^•^^' 

3. Anna, b. Mch. rq, 1744. ■ e- K . 

Y Joseph Luddington, s. of Matthew, dec'd, 
m. Mercy Peck, wid. of Jeremiah, Jr., 
iMch. 3 1754. 

I. Rachel, b. Feb. 8, 1759. 

Moses Ludington and Sarah: 

5. Mary, b. May 27, 1744. 

6. Jeruslia, h. Oct. 4, 1746. 

7. Sarah, b. June 27, 1748. , 

8. Moses, b. Aug. 4, 1750. 

9. Lucy, b. Jan. 15, 1753. 
10. Luman, b. Mch. 20, 1757. 

II. Eunice, b. Feb. 22, 1759. 

Naomi Ludington m. Josiah Tuttle, 1740, 
and Gideon Allin, 1751, 

Rebecca Ludington m. Eben. Brown, 
i7,si. 

iRuth Lutington m. Jon. Cook, 1735. 
Sarah Ludington: 

I. Molle, b. Apr. i6, 1766. 

Mary E. Lum m. Henry Spencer, 1850. 
Michael Lynch m. Mary McGinnis in 
New Haven, June, 1843. 

1. Catharine, b. in New Haven, May, 1844. 

2. Mary Ann, b. Mch. 2, 1846. 

Aaron S. Lyon of Reading m. Sarah E. 

Austin, Nov. 4, 1845. 
Mary Lyon m. Samuel Foot, 1750, and 

Timothy Judd, 17S0. 
Charity Mallery m. Jesse HotchkLss, 1759. 
Eunice Mallory m. James Brown, 1783. 
Harriet Mallory m. E. Robinson, 1S2S. 
Hester Mallery m. Joseph Osborn, 1742. 
Ira Mallery of Middlebury, s. of David, 

m. Susan Morris, d. of Shelden, Nov. 

29, 1S21. '' 

Irena Mallery m. Jairus Bronson, 1804. 
Jonah Mallery and his wife [Hannah]: 

2. Hannah, b. May 5, 1767. 

3. Allen, b. Apr. 18, 1769 (Jonathan A.?) 

4. Abigail, b. Nov. 20, 1771. 

5. Jonah, b. Sept. 29, 1773. 

6. Peter, b. Oct. g, 1775. 

7. Silva, b. Feb. 7, 1778. 
* Lydia, 1 

Levi, y Twins / b. Aug. 20, 1781. 
Lucy, i 

Phebe Mallery m. John Thomas, 1750. 
Sarah Mallary m. G. C. Scarritt, 1S50. 
Thomas Mallery: 

2. David, b. Mch. 6, 1756. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 11, 1758. 

4. Sarah, b. June 25, 1760. 

5. Esther, b. Feb. 20, 1762. 



* It will he noticed that t'he recorder used an exclamation point instead of numbers in this entry. 



FA 3111 Y RECORDS!. 



Ap 87 



Mallery. Martin. 

6. Anne, b. Nov. 5, 1763. 

7. Thomas, b. July 27, 176s. 

8. Enos, b. May 24, 1768. 

Urane Mallery m. Elemuel Hoadley, 
1767. 

Douglass F. Maltby of North Branford 
m. Rebecca T. Bronson [d. of Beimel] 
June 19, 1S44. She d. Aug. 8, 1S45, and 
Douglass m. Mary Ann Somers [d. of 
James], Feb. 26, 1S51. 

Elizabeth Maltby m. Bennet Bronson, 
I S20. 

Betsey Manchester m. Daniel Brown. 

Jerusha Manchester m. Bela Warner, 
1S33. 

Naomi Manchester m. R. F. Upson, 1S42. 

Emery Mann m. Lucinda Atwater, d. of 
Bela, Apr. 2S, 1S2S. 

Hiram E. Mann m. Lucy C. [d. of Har- 
vey Judd and Jemina Hikcox], May iS, 
1S37. 

Elisha D. Mansfield and Caroline B. 
Yale — both of South Canaan — m. Nov. 
28, 1850. 

George Mansfield, s. of Richard of Ox- 
ford, m. Esther Pardee, d. of Rqswell, 
Dec. 25, 1834. 

1. Sarah Jane, b. Oct. 11, 1838. 

2. Hobart, b. JNIay 23, 1841. 

Louisa Mardenbrough m. E. C. Peck, 

1839. 
Edward Marks of Wolcotville m Eliza 

Clark, Oct. 10, 1S38. 
Zachariah Marks m. Ame Twichel, d. of 

Joseph, Dec. i, 1783.'' 
Sally Markum m. Levi Scott, 1S04. 
Louisa Marr m. Joshua Swan, 1850. 
Alice Marshall m. Wm. Bassford, 1S4S. 
Lorinda Marshall m. Nelson Hall, 1828. 

Martin Marshall from Eng.. and Mary 
Fay from Ire., m. in Brooklyn, N. Y., 
Apr., 1842. 

Alice, b. Dec. 14, 1842. 
Ann, b. June 27, 1844. 
Amelia, b. Nov. 23, 1846. 

Albert H. Martin, b. Oct. 14, 1S19, s. of 
Granville, m. Catharine A. Bronson, 
d. of Sherman, Dec. 6, 1840. 

1. Stella Caroline, b. Sept. 29, 1841. 

2. [Cornelia], b. May 14, 1845. 

Ann Martin m. Harris Hotchkiss, 1830. 
James Martin, b. May, 1806, and Mary 

McDougal, b. Jan., 1800, m. in N. H., 

Nov. 25, 1833. 

I. Mary, b. 1834. 

Juley Martin m. F. A. Ellis, 1828. 
Julia Martin m. Truman Hopkins, 1824. 



Martix. Matthews. 

Patrick Martin, b. Nov. 24, 1812, and 

]Mary Riley, b. June 24, 1820, m. in Ire., 

Aug. 23, 1835. 

1. Ann, b. in Ire., May 13, 1837. 

2. Catharine, b. Oct. i, 1843. 

3. James, b. Nov. 26, 1845. 

Philena Martin m. Cyrus Chatiield, 1848. 
Philip Martin, a negro, was m. to Sarah, 
a squaw, 

1. Grove, b. May 27, 1792; d. Sept. 25, 1827. 

2. Andrew, b. Apr. 18, 1794. 

3. Luna, b. Apr ig,' 1796. 

4. Silvester, b. Sept. 2, 1798. 

5. Briant, b. Feb. 19, 1800. 

6. Hannah Isabila, b. May 7, 1804. 

7. I'.etsey Jidian, b. Sept. 15, 1810. 

[Philip Martin of Woodbridge sold to 

Joseph Porter, 1800, 5 A. in Sequester. 

Jethro IMartain and Olive — negroes — 

m. in Oxford, Dec. 31, 1788.] 
Celia A. Mase m. S. G. Hunt, 1851. 
Anna Matthews m. Silas Tyrrell, 1S43. 
Benjamin Matthews and Lucey [d. of 

Joseph Clark]: 

1. Gideon, b. Oct. 12, 1741. 

2. Eunice, b. Nov. 23, 1743. 

3. Lucy, b. Oct. 6, 1745. 

4. Abigail, b. Apr. 5, 1748. 

John Matthews and Anna [d. of Benja- 
min Wetmore]: 

1. Anna, b. at Middletown, May 13, 1751. 

2. Sibbel, b. Sept. 23, 1752. 

3. John, b. at Middletown, Jan. 29, 1754. 

4. Lida, b. Apr. 14, 17S7. 

5. Roswell, b. Nov. 29, 175S. 

6. Rachel, b. Jan. 21, 1761. 

7. Abner, b. Mch. 29, 1763. 

Joseph Matthews and Lowes; their first 
child born in Wat., as foUoweth: 

1. Nathan 'I'yler, b. Nov. 6, 1763. 

Joseph Matthews' wife d. Aug. 20, 1801, 

a. 71.'' 
Phineas Matthews s. of Thomas, m. 

Else Tomkins, d. of Edmund, Mch. 23, 

1747-8. He cl. Dec. 26, 1763, and Else 

m. Stephen Judd. 

1. Eunice, b. Feb. 4, 1747-S; d. Sept. 15, 1749. 

2. Thomas, b. Mch. 28, 1751. 

3. Amos, b. Mch. 8, 1753. 

4. Eunice, b. Veh. 4, 1756 [m. Thomas Atwell]. 

Rebeckah Mathews m. Benj. Brockett, 

1791. 
Reuben Matthews, s. of Joseph of Wal- 

lingford, and Adah Curtis, d. of Enoch 

of Farmington; children: 

2. Lucas, b. Aug. 24, 1772. 

3. Samuel, b. Dec. 15, 1774; d. Feb., 1776. 

4. Samuel, b. Oct. 13, 1776. 

Stephen Matthews, s. of Thomas, m. 
Hannah Parker, d. of Samuel of Wal- 
lingford, Dec. 5, 1750. 

1. Gideon, b. Sept. 20, 1751. 

2. Stephen, b. Sept. 9; d. Oct. 23, 1753. 

3. Merriam, b. Nov. 4, 1754. 



lAp 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Matthews. 



McCoRMACK. 



4. Stephen, b. Dec. 22, 1756; d. May 15, 1758. 

5. Sarah, b. Oct. 30, 1758. 

6. Mildred, b. Aug. 2, 1760. 

7. Daniel, b. Apr. 18, 1762; d. Mch. 16, 1766. 

8. Phinehas, b. Apr. 19, 1765. 

9. Daniel, b. Jan. 7, 1767. 

10. William, b. Dec. 25, 176S. 

11. Hannah, b. Dec. 13; d. Dec. 31, 1770. 

12. Abiah, b. Dec. 11, 1771; m. L. Dayton? 

Thomas Matthews' children: 

Gideon, his sun, d. May 29, 1740. 

Thomas Matthews, Esq., m. Mrs. Han- 
nah Scott, Mch. 26, 1784^ [and d. Sept. 
6, 179S, a. 9SJ. 

William Matthews m. Charity Kimber- 
ly, May 11, 178S. 

Stephen, b. Jan. 18, 1789.3 

Zeba Matthews, b. in Danbury, Mch. 
16, 17S5, and Johannah AUyn, b. in 
Groton, Aug. 19, 17S7, m. Aug. 24. 
1806. 

1. Thomas B., b. Nov. i, 1S07. 

2. William A., b. Feb. 28, 1809; d. in Wolcotville, 

(.)ct. 23, 1835. 

3. Lyman B., b. Nov. 5, 1810; d. in Baltimore, 

Dec. 20, 1834. 

4. John F., b. Sept. 6, 1812. 

5. Abby Ann, b. Sept. 11, 1814. 

6. Mary Jane, b. Nov. 10, 1816; m. Dennis Chat- 

field. 

7. Rachel, b. Dec. 21, 1818; d. Mch. 6, 1843. 

8. Anna, b. Sept. 11, 1821; m. Silas Tyrrell. 

9. Hannah Urena, b. July 29, 1823; m. Henry 

Churchill. 

10. Henry A., b. Nov. 24, 1825. 

11. George W., b. Sept. 12, 1828; d. in Plymouth, 

May 7, 1838. 
All these were born in Goshen. 

Zene Matthews m. Reuben Beebe. 

Amasa Mattoon m. Elizabeth Dayton, 
May 25, 1780.^ 

1. William, b. Dec. 23, 1780. 

2. Curtiss, b. Mch. 9, 1782. 

3. Betsey, b. June 18, 1783. 

4. Bethel, b. Oct. 9, 1784. 

5. David, b. May 29, 1787. 

Esther Matoon m. John Foot, 1764. 
Isaac A. Mattoon, b. in New Haven, 

Aug. 23, 1S25, m. Eliza Jane Lang, d. 

of Joseph, Dec. 24, 1846. 
Mrs. Abigail McAlpin, d. Dec. 6, 1845, 

a. 76.* 
Bernard McAvoy m. JMarv Gaffnev, July 

10, 1851. » 

John McAvoy m. Julia Bergen, June iq, 
1851.8 

Terrence McCaffrey m. Mrs. Cornelius 

Donnelly, May, 1841. 
Patrick Mackan (McCann) of Belvill, 

County of Westmaid, Ireland, m. Lucy 

Low, Jan., 1840. 

1. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 29, 1842. 

2. Eliza Jane, b. Jan. 7, 1845. 

Michael McCormackm. Mary Finnegan, 
J uly 31, 1S49. 



McDkrmot. Mekkiman. 

James McDermot of Plymouth m. Mar- 
garet McGuire of Watertown, Jan. 7, 
184S. 

William McDermott m. Bridget Reed, 

Nov. 1, 1845. 

I. Kllen, b. Feb. 28, 1847. 

James McDonald m. Julia Karen, 1843. 

1. Mary Ann, 1). Mch. 20, 1S44. 

2. Ellt-n, li. Sept. 29, 1845. 

3. Martin, b. May 27, 1847. 

John W. [McJDonald m. Mary Sheei-an, 

:\ich. 4, 1 85 1. 

Patrick McDonnald m. Alice Loughman, 
Sept. 10, 1S4S. 

Sally McDonald in. Harvey Hill, 1S09. 
Ann McDougall m. James Walker, 1843. 
James McEwen of Oxford m. Sally 

Delia Candee of Salem, Apr. 3, 1831. 
Samuel H. McKee m. Celista Prichard, 

d. of John, June 12, 1828. 
William McKey, s. of William, m. Anne 

Baldwin, d. of Samuel of Milford, May 

3. 1797- 

■I. Harriet, b. Feb. i. 1798. 

John Marcloud (McLaud ?) was mar. to 

^lary Brown, Dec. 21, 1780, by Rev. 

IMark Leavenworth. 
Agnes McLean m. Andrew Walker. 
Dolly McLellan m. Edward B. Cook, 

1 83 1. 
Eliza McLallan m. Joseph Lang, 1S19. 
Patrick McMahon m. Bridget McGinn, 

Aug. 9, 1S51.S 
Bernard McManey m. Mary McNally in 

Hartford, May, 1S45. 

I. John, b. Apr. 10, 1846. 

Alexander McNeal m. Sarah M. North- 
rop, Apr. 13, 1845. 

William McNeil from Scotland m. Mary- 
ette Neville from Ireland, in New- 
York, Feb. 7, 1840. 

1. John Alexander, b. Sept. 25, 1841; d. 1S44. 

2. William Timothy, b. Sept. 7, 1843. 

3. Mary Elizabeth, b. Jan. 2, 1S46. 

Merlin Mead of South Salem, N. Y., m. 

Polly Clark, d. of Eli, Nov. 14, 1S20. 
Dr. John D. Meres m. Susan Bateman — 

both of Xaugatuck — Aug. 17, 1835. 
Laura Mecan m. Samuel Sperry, 1832. 
Rachel Meky m. Isaac Camp, 1770. 
Abigail Merriam m. J. H. Sandland, 

Antoinette Merriam m. B. H. Leaven- 
worth, 1S4O. 
Charles J. Merriam m. Lydia A. Curtiss 
of Litchfield, Mch. 30, 1846. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



jMerriam. :\Ierkill. 

Christopher Merriam m. Rebecah Garn- 
sey, Mch. 23, 177S. 

I. Allen, b. July i, 1779. ^ 
Rebecca, b. Apr. 8, 1787. 

Elizabeth Merriam m. S. H. Welton, 

1844. 
[Esther Merriam m. Dr. Benj. Hull, Joth- 

am Curtiss, 1770, Nathaniel Barnes, 

1798, and Elislia Wilcox, 1^99. She d.7 

a wid. in 1829, a. 75.] 
Isaac Merriam, s. of Joseph, of Walling- 

ford, m. Sarah Scovill, d. of Edward, 

Feb. 21, 1760. 

1. Joseph Scovill, b. May 5, 1761. 

2. James, b. Aug. 25, 1763. 

3. David, b. Aug. 30, 1766; d. Jan. 3, 1774. 

4. Elijah, b. July 13, 1769; d. Jan. 8, 1774. 

5. Isaac, b. Feb. 29, 1772. 

6. David, b. June 8, 1774. 

7. Elijah, b. Mch. 3, 1777. 

James Merriam m. Olive Guernsey, May 

18, 1786.-' 
John Merriam (Merriman on prob. rec), 

m. Hannah Fenn [d. of Thomas], July 

12, 1764. 

I. Asal, b. June 26; d. Oct. 13, 1765. 

Hannah, 

Rachel, ; d. Aug. 25, 1771. 

Joseph S. Merriam m. Susanna Kimber- 
ly, Feb. 6, 1783. 

Edward Scovill, b. July 16, 17S4. 
Sally, b. Oct. 4, 1785. 
Harvey, b. Sept. 14, i7S5(?). 
Anna, b. Aug. 17, 1788. 

Levi Merriam, b. June 28, 1787-^ 
Lucy Merriam m. Caleb Barnes, Jr., 1776 
Lucy Merriam m. Jos. Pennell, 1846. 
Martha B. Merriam m. G. J. Frost, 1833 
Rufus Merriam's wife d. Feb. 6, 1809.^ 
Rufus Merriam and Sarah:^ 



\ 



Rufus, Lucius, Lucy, Rebecca, b. July 24, 181 1; 
m. Joseph Moss, 1835, and Sarah, bap. Aug., 
1821. 

Sarah S. Merriam m. Pitkin Bronson, 
1839. 

Shelden Merriam of Watertown m. Nan- 
cy Bronson, d. of Philenor, Dec. 2, 1821. 

Thomas Merriam, s. of William, m. Ann 
Moss, d. of John— all of Wallingford— 
Jan. 22, 1756. 

1. Joel, b. Feb. 10, 1759. 

2. Ruth, b. July ig, 1762. 

3. Thomas, b. Apr. 17, 1766. 

4. Ame, b. June 6, 1768. 

5. Reuben, b. Oct. 19, 1771.8 

6. Asahel, b. Nov. 25, 1773. 

7. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 2, 1778. 

8. Levi Moses, b. May 9, 1782. 

Ann d. Jan. 15, 1782, and Thomas m. 
Sarah Parker, July 10, 1783. 
See also ]\Ierriman. 
, Caleb Merrill, s. of Nathl., m. Susanna 



Merrill. Merils. 

Tompkins, d. of Edmund, Nov. 5, 1753. 
[He d. May 3, 1812, and she, Dec. 10, 
1S18, a. 84.] 

1. Ichabod, b. June 17, 1754. 

2. Nathaniel, b. Mch. 25, 1756. 

3. Rachel, b. Jan. 30, 1759; ra. Jared Hikcox. 

4. Elijah Tompkins, b. June 26, 1761. 

5. Esther, b. Apr. i, 1764 [m. Araasa Scovill]. 

6. Asor, b. July 8; d. Aug. 15, 1766. 

7. Susa, b. May 7, 1769 [m. Kellogg]. 

8. Sarah, b. June 7, 1771 [m. Bradley]. 

g. Caleb, b. Nov. 20, 1773 [d. in Oxford, N. Y., 

Feb. 1844]. 
10. Lydia; m. Ansel Lewis. 

[Ebenezer Pardee Merrill, s. of Nathl. 

of Caleb, m. Mahala Hill, June 10, 

1S19.] 
Elijah F. Merrill, s. of Ichabod, m. 

Annah Perkins, d. of Archibald of 

Woodbridge, Apr. 25, 1811. 

1. Junius Frisbie, b. Sept. 30, 1812. 

2. Henry Augustus, b. June i, 1815. 

3. Sarah Maria, b. June 25, 1818. 

4. Adaline, b. May 15, 1820. 
[5. Nathan, b. May 14, 1823.] 
6. Charles, b. Oct. 5, 1825. 

[7. Huldah, b. Dec. 27, 1827; d. Dec, 1828.] 

8. George, b. Oct. 14, 1830. 

g. Franklin B., b. Apr. 3, 1834. 

10. John F., b. July 7, 1836. 

11. Ellen Augusta, b. Jan. 27, 1839. 

Elijah Tompkins Merrils, s. of Caleb, 
m. Cloe Scott, d. of Benjamin, Apr. 22, 

1784. 

1. Mercy, b. Dec. 3, 1785. 

2. Arad, b. Apr. 8, 1788. 

3. Ansel, b. Oct. 20, 1797. 
[Esther, b. 1800; d. 1815.] 

Ephraim Merrils, s. of Nathl., m. Jeru- 
sha Tompkins, d. of Edmund, Dec. 26, 
1753- 

1. Elizabeth, b. Nov. 12, 1754. 

2. Jeptha, b. Dec. 2, 1756. 

3. Noah, b. Mch. 10, 1759. 

4. Ephe, b. Oct. 5, 1761. 

5. Sarah, b. July 8, 1763. 

6. Aaron, b. July 6, 1765. 

Garry Merrel m. Rebeckah Payne, Sept. 

2, 1821. 
Harriet Merrill m. N. J. Cleveland, 1849. 
Ichabod Merrills was m. to Sarah Frisbie, 

by Alex. Gillet, paster, Dec. 23, 1780, 

and d. Dec. 24, 1829. [Sarah d. Mch., 

1842.] 

1. Prudence, b. Feb. i, 1782. 

2. Elijah Frisbie, b. Apr. 2, 1788. 

3. Sarah, b. July 15, 1791. 

Julia Merrel m. John Grimsel, 1850. 
Lydia Merrills; her child: 

Mahala Hill, b. Oct. 25, 1797 [m. E. P. Merrill], 

Mary Merrill m. W. B. Dunbar, 183S. 

Nathaniel Merils [b. July 15, 1702], s. of 
J(jhn of Hartford, m. Esther Warner, 
d. of Ephraim, Nov. 16, 1729. He d. 
Oct. 28, 1772 [she, June 2, 1795, a. 88]. 

I. Sarah, b. July 14, 1730; m. Joshua Terrill and 
Daniel Brown. 



90 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Mkuils. 



Mer-win. 



2. Epliraim, b. Oct. 9, 1733. 

3. Caleb, b. Oct. 26, 1735. 

4. David, b. Mch. 30, 1738. 

5. Daniel, b. last of Keli., 1741 2. 

6. John, b. Au.iT. 14, 1744. 

Nathaniel Merrils, s. of Caleb, m. Onner 
(Honorj Dowd, d. of Jacob, Oct. 4, 
1 78 1. 

1. Clue, 1). Jan. 25, 1782; m. Obadiah Richards. 

2. Caleb, b. Nov. 7, 1783. 

3. Chester, b. Mch. 15, 1786. 

4. Mary, b. Feb. 29; d. Dec. i, 17S8. 

5. Seth, b. Dec. 25, 1789 [m. Alabel Sanford]. 
[6. Jared. 7. Erastus. 8. J. Mark. 

Honor d. June, 1796, and Nathaniel m. 
Mary Pardee, b. Aug. 10, 1795 

q. Ebenezer Pardee, b. Oct. 6, 1707. 
10. John, b. Apr. 22, iSoo.J 

Mrs. Merrill d. Apr. i, 1S42, a. 87.- 

Amanda Merriman m. Sam. Chatlield, 

1S3S. 

Augustine Merriman m. Wm. Butler, 

1840. 
Caleb Merriman and ]\Iargret: 

3. Rebeckah, b. Nov. 7, 1750. 

4. Jesse, b. Dec. 25, 1752. 

5. Caleb, b. Apr. 4, 1754. 

Charles Merriman [s. of Amasa] m. 
Anna Punderson [d. of David and 
Thankful], May ib, 17S4. 

1. Betsev, b. Sept. 16, 17S6. 

2. Willia'in Henry, b. Sept. 27, 1788.8 

"Charles Buckingham Merriman, b. in 

Watertown, (Jet. 9, 1809, s. of William 
H., and Mary Margaret Field, d. of 
Dr. Edward, were m. June 30, 1841, by 
Rev. David Root. 

I. Charlotte Buckingham, b. Au.vj. 21, 1S43. 
J. Sarah Alorton, b. Aug. 7, 1S45. 

Joel Merriman:^ 

Joel Sanforcl, l.iap. June 3, 1804. 
Carnline, bap. Oct. 6, 1805. 

John Merriman of New Haven m. Caro- 
line Lewis [d. of Milo], Feb. 11, 1844. 

Joseph P. Merriman m. Julia E. Judd [d. 
ni Hawkins], Aug. 23, 1840. 

Lament Merriman m. Reuben Benham, 
1775- 

Phebe Merriman m. Asher Castle, 1784.^ 

Phebe Merriman m. Asahel Hotchkiss, 
1794. 

Rebeckah Merriman m. Henry Terrel, 
1S28, and Henry Chatfield, 1836. 

Sarah Merriman m. Simeon Peck, 17S1. 

Thankful Merriman m. Phin. Royce, 
1743- 

Jane Merter(?) m. J. C. Hall, 1848. 

Eunice Merwin m. Benj. Hoadley, 1796. 

Joseph Merwin:' 

Alvira, b. Jan. 4, 1786. 
Willard, b. May 6, 1788. 



IMiLAN. Minor. 

Richard Milan m. Julia Delany, July 14, 

i85i.« 
Eunice Miles m. Stephen Culver. 
Hannah Miles m. Joseph Beach, 1782. 
Mary Miles m. Edwin Sperry, 1831. 
MoUe Miles m. Sam. Hopkins, 1771. 
Stephen Miles and Rebecca [Umber- 

villc?]: 

1. Abi:.jail, b. May 5, 1755. 

2. John, b. Mch. i, 1757. 

3. Tinion, b. \\>t. 22, 1759. 

4. Sarah, b. Apr. 22, 1761. 

5. Isaac, b. July 11, 1763. 

Timon Miles, s. of Stephen, m. Mercy 
Judd, d. of Capt. Sam., Apr. 5, 17S5, 
and d. May 21, 1833. 

1. Phila, b. Nov. 14, 1791 [m. Anson Stocking). 

2. Caroline, b. July 10, 1805; m. Leonard Warner. 

Zalmon Millard of Cornwall m. Elizabeth 
Terrel, d. of Josiah of Salem, Nov. 6, 
1826. 

Constant Miller m. Abigail Ailing, Dec. 
25. 1776. 

1. Hannah, b. 1777. 

2. David, b. 1779. 

3. Daniel, b. 1781. 

4. Abigail, b. 1783. 

5. Samuel, b. 1785. 

Mary Miller m. Dr. Remus Fowler, 1S27. 

Smith Miller of Amisvill (?) Onida Co., N. 

Y., m. Lydia Bracket, Oct. 5, 1825. 

Elizabeth Mills ni. John Fairclough, 

1817. 

Mary Millward m. J. P. Jeffrey, 1S38. 

Orlando W. Minard, b. in Colchester, 
Nov. 12, 1816, s. of Alexander, m. Har- 
riet Stetson, d. of Stephen of Preston, 
May 3, 1837. 

1. Orlando, b. June 15, 1838; d. Oct., 1839. 

2. Charles, b. Feb. 15, 1840. 

Harriet d. Jan. 21, 1842, a. 25; and Or- 
lando m. Caroline E. Mi.x, d. of Ran- 
som, Aug. 20, 1843. 

3. Harriet, b. May i^, 1844. 

4. Ellen, b. Nov. 14, 1846. 

David A. Minor m. Elizabeth V. Hull, 
July 25, 1830. 

Harriet Minor m. G. W. Welton, 1837. 

Henry Minor of Wolcott m. Sarah Jane 
Clark, June 21, 1837. 

Solomon B. Minor, b. at Woodbury, Jan. 
20, 17S5, s. of Solomon and Mary, was 
mar. to Cynthia A. Carrington, b. at 
Plymouth, Sept. 2, 1817, d. of Solomon 
and Cynthia, in Wat., by Rev. H. B. 
Elliot, Feb. 18, 1849. 

1. Solomon Carrington, b. June 4, 1850. 

2. Angeline .Mary, b. Dec. 23, 1851; d. Apr., 1855. 

3. Julia Antoinette, b. June i, 1854. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



ap91 



Minor. "Sli^. 

4. Emily Terry, b. June lo, 1857. 

5. Mary Root, b. Feb. 11, 1859.* 

Edward Mitchell m. Ellen Reenan— both 
of Plymouth— Aug. 22, 1849. 

George W. Mitchell m. Sarah Jane Web- 
ster of Harwinton, Jan. 3, 1S49. 

John Mitchel of New Haven, s. of Pat- 
rick from Ireland, m. Abigail Frost, d. 
of Rev. Jesse, Apr. 7, 1S33. 

T. Lucy Adeline, b. Feb. 14, 1834. 

2. Maria Antoinette, b. Sept. 17, 1836. 

3. George William, b. Feb. 18, 1842. 

John S. Mitchell, Jr. of New York, m. 
Mary L. Benedict, d. of Aaron, Jan. 3, 

1S3S' 

I. Charles Benedict, b. Sept. 16, 1840. 

Nancy Mitchell m. W. Fuller, 1S44. 
Thomas Mitchell, b. Feb. 8, i779-'* 
Eldad Mix, s. of Josiah of Wallingford. 

m. Lidea Beach, d. of Joseph, June 25, 

1756. 

1. Titus, b. Feb. 14, 1757, and killed in the Battle 

of Harlem, Sept. iS, 1776. 

2. Amos, b. Feb. 2, 1759. 

' 3. Samuel, b. Jan. 17, 1761. 

4. Levi, b. Sept. 15, 1763. 

5. Sibel, b. Apr. 13, 1767; m. Gershom Olds. 

6. Uri, b. July 23, 1769. 

7. Philo, b. Oct. 28, 1773. 

8. Lydia, b. Apr. 13, 1777. 

0. Sarah, b. Jan. 2, 1782. 

John Mix [s. of Philo], and Anna Lines 
of Oxford, b. Feb. 21, 1804, m. at Hum- 
phreysville, Apr. 15, 1S34, by Rev. Sam- 
uel R. Hikcox. 

1. David, b. Feb. 16, 1835; bap. by Rev. S. Wash- 

burn. 

2. Philo, b. Mch. 20, 1S3S; bap. by Rev. Fitch 

Read. 

Levi Mix, s. of Eldad, m. Eunice An- 
drews, d of Asael of Cheshire, Sept. 7, 
1789. 

Philo Mix, s. of Eldad, m. Anna Hall, 
d. of Prindle of Wallingford, Nov. 30, 
1797. 

1. Seth, b. May 14, 1799. 

2. John, b. Nov. 24, 1800. 

3. David, b. Aug. 18, 1802. 

4. Amos, b. Mch. 15, 1804. 

5. Anna, b. May 7, 1806; m. Larmoii Johnson. 

6. Eunice, b. Apr. 10, i8og. 

7. Delight, b. Sept. 28, 1810; m. Sam. Rose. 

Ransom Mix, b. Mch. 28, 1792, s. of Uri 
of North Haven, m. Sept. 15, 1819, 
Aurelia Bronson, b. June 13, 1799, d. of 
Philenor. 

1. Caroline Eliz., b. Apr. 22, 1821; m. O. Minard. 

2. Emma Almira, b. Feb. 10, 1828. 

3. Harriet A., b. 1833; d. a. 10 months. 

Samuel Mix, s. of Eldad, m. Mary Hotch- 
kiss, d. of Henry of Cheshire, Dec. 13, 
1781. 



Mi.\. jNIgrris. 

1. Amasa Hotchkiss, b. Dec. 29, 1783. 

2. Samuel Francis, b. Mch. 15, 1786. 

3. Titus Freeman, b. Oct. 3, 1788. 

4. Chancy Smith, b. Mch. 28, 1791. 

5. Mary Ann, b. May 3, 1793. 

6. Sally, b. Jan. 9, 1797. 

7. Esther, b. July 14, 1802; m. M. Olmstead. 

Francis Moffit m. Ellen Hogan, July 3, 
1849. 

Hannah Moody m. J. D. Rigby, 1S24. 
Betsey Moore m. Jabez Walton. 
Emma Moore m. Edward Jeffrey, 1S35. 
Andrew Moran m. Margaret Heffren in 
New Haven, Aug., 1S45. 

1. John, b. July 29, 1S46. 

Henry Moran ni. Margaret Phelan, Feb. 

18, 1851. 
James Moran m. Marv Reed, Apr. 23, 

1850. 
William Moran and Bridget Neville— 

both from Eng. — m. in Ireland. 

1. Catharine, b. May 11, 1837. 

2. Margarett, b. May 12, 1S39. 

3. Tane, b. Apr. 24, 1841. 

4. John Henry, b. Mch. 5, 1843. 

Jennet Morehouse m. David E. Downs, 

1837- 
Asahel Morgan, s, of John, m. Armenia 

Bcebe, d. of Ira, Sept. 25, 1776. 

1. Asa, b. Mch. 25, 1777. 

2. Ira Beebe, b. Sept. 29, 1778. 

3. Sylvester, b. Dec. 27, 1793. 

4. ^Iartin, b. Dec. 2, 1796. 

5. Minerva, b. July 19, 1801. 

6. Eli Lewis, b. Aug. 25, 1805. 

Isaac Morgan m. Marv Foot, Apr. 3,- 
1786. 

1. Asahel, b. Apr. 30, 17S7. 

2. Daniel Hubbard, b. Aug. 7, 1788; d. 1789. 

3. Sally, b. Jan. 17, 1790. 

4. Fanny, b. Dec. 14, 1791. 

Mary Morgan m. Isaac Bronson, 1701. 

Nathan N. Morgan of Diniock, Penn., 
m. :Marietta Davis, May 6, 183S. 

Rosetta Morgan m. Joel Terrill, 1832. 

Sophia Morgan m. Ezra J. Warner, 1840. 

Eugene Moriarty m. Johanna Sheehan, 
Sept. 10, 1849. 

Amos Morris, s. of Major, m. Mary At- 
kins from Southington, May 29, 1S16. 

1. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 10, 1817; m. F. J. Woodruff. 

2. Mary ^L, b. Feb. 10, 1819. 

(Marv Ann, b. Feb. 10, 1822; m. W. Umber- 
field.) 

3. Eliza, b. May 25, 1826. 

4. Eli A., b. Apr. 3, 1830; d. Apr. 7, 1833. 

5. Eunice, b. Aug. 24, 1832. 

Mary d. Aug. 30, 1S32, a. 38 yrs. ; and 
Amos m. Nov. 27, 1833, Anna, wid. of 
Isaac Hine. 



* This is the only family of children recorded from 1847 to 1851. 



92 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



MoKRiss. Moss. 

John N. Morriss, s. of Sheldon, m. Polly 

Chatfield, d. of Daniel, Feb. 16, 1825. 

1. Leonard A., b. Feb. i6, 1826. 

2. William H., b. Feb. 22, 1828. 

3. George M., b. Oct. 7, 1833. 

4. Catharine E., b. Nov. i, 1837. 

Julius Morris, b. May 18, 1796, s. of 
David, m. Hannah Scovill, d. of Oba- 
diah, Apr. 15, 1818. 

1. Fanny Jennett, b. Oct. 23, 1820; d. 1S25. 

2. Julia Ann, b. Sept. 14, 1823. 

3. William Augustus, b. Apr. 5, 1825. 

Leonard A. Morris m. Priscilla IT. Sand- 
land, ]\Iay 9, [847. 

[Major Morris of Wuodbridge m. Eliza- 
beth, d. of John and Sarah (Sanford) 
Hine of Milford. He d. Sept. 5, iSii.] 

Miles Morris [b. Apr. 27, 17S5, twin to 
Newton], s. of Major, m. Caty Scott, 
d. of Ashley, Esq., in 1S15. She d. 
July, 1837, and Miles m. Mary, wid. of 
Joseph Riggs, and d. of Arah Cady of 
Middlebury, Aug., 1845. 

1. Miles, b. Oct. 30, 1841=;. 

Miles Morris of Canaan m. Jane E. For- 
rest, Jan. 27, 1847. 

[Newton Morris, b. Apr. 27, 17S5, m. 
Apr. 27, 1809, Molly Hotchkiss, b. Feb. 
I, 1789, d. of Thelus.] 

Merit Noyes, Henry Newton (b. 1810), Isaac 
Amos (b. 1811), and Sarah Ann (b. 1813), bap. 
May 26, 1817.1 

Edwin, bap. May 10, 1S18. 

Eunice Atwater, bap. July 29, 1S21. 

Harriet, bap. July 20, 1823. 

Jane Elizabeth, hap. May i, 1831. 

Samuel W. Morris, b. Jan. 29, 1808, and 
Eunice Upson, b. Oct. 17, iSio, d. of 
Obed, m. Oct. 12, 1S31. 

1. Marietta, b. Jan. 25, 1833. 

2. Cornelia, b. Feb. 17, 1838. 

3. Herbert, b. Nov. 27, 1845. 

Sheldon Morris:' 

Polly Ann, bap. July 8, 1828. 
Susan; m. Ira Mallery, 1821. 

Theodore Morris m. Charlotte Yale, Feb. 

27, 1S4S. 

William A. Morris m. Mary Ann Car- 
bury, May 30, 1S48. 

Richard Morrow m. Lucy Jane Smith, 
June 3, 1839. 

Betsey Moses m. Mills B. Ford, 1S40. 

Deborah Moses m. Joseph Weed, 1740. 

Salina Moses m. F. A. Bailey, 1S35. 

Sarah Moses m. Silas Johnson, 1733. 

Ann Moshier m. John Bagshaw, 1838. 

Ann Moss m. Thomas Merriam, 1756. 

Ann Moss m. Enos A. Pierpont, 1837. 

Charles E. Moss from Litchfield m. 

Marcia Castle from Harwinton, Dec. 

25, 1S42, 



Moss. IMUNSON. 

1. Charles Eugene, b. Nov. 17, 1843. 

2. Marcia Eugene, b. July 23, 1845. 

Emeline Moss m. F. H. Pratt, 1832. 
Harmon C. Moss m. Roxanna Morse of 

Litchfield, Oct. 18, 1840. 
Joseph Moss and Esther: 

1. Esther, ) 

and vb. June 19, 1768. 

2. Elizabeth, \ 

3. Jared, b. Jan. 10, 1771. 

Joseph Moss, b. Aug. 25, 1807, s. of 
M(jses of Cheshire, m. Rebecca Mer- 
riam, d. of Rufus of Prospect, June 4, 
1835- 

1. Levi Joseph, b. Aug. 21, 1836; d. 1839. 

2. Rufus Franklin, b. Jan. 17, 1838; d. 1839. 

3. Levi, b. June 22, 1840. 

4. Franklin, b. June 11, 1843. 

Joshua Moss m. Abigail Hull of Wal- 
lingford, Feb. 8, 1764. 

I. Abigail Russell, b. Dec. 30, 1764. 

Lent Moss and Charlotte :9 

Lydia, Lent, Luther, Levi, Harry, and \m\ 
-\nn, bap. June 24, 1821. 

Martha Moss m. Eben. Foot, 1752. 
Ruth Moss m. Eben. Elwell, 1741. 
Thankful Moss m. Abel Doolittle, 1744. 
William Moss of Litchfield m. Mariette 
Walden of Norwich, Oct. 3, 1847. 

Thomas Mulligan m. in Ireland ^lartha 
^lulligan, b. in Ma3^ 1823. 

I. Semira, h. Jan. 7, 1847. 

John Mullings from England m. Eliza- 
beth Brooks from Bethany, ^Ich. 30, 
1 844. 

1. Georgiana Elizabeth, b. Apr. 10, 1845. 

2. [Mary Ella], b. Apr. 8, 1847. 

John Mulvahill m. Annaugh Mackan 
(Anna McCan?) in Ire., Dec, 1S41. 

1. John, b. in Ireland, Dec. 12, 1842. 

2. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 12, 1844. 

3. Elinor, b. Sept. 6, 1846. 

Timothy Mulvany m. Bridget Kelly, Feb. 
10, 1851. 

Daniel T. Munger m. Eliza A. Russell 
of Brandford, Mch. 17, 1839. 

1. Caroline Eliza, b. May 11, 1843. 

2. .Adelaide Ulissa, b. Aug. 26, 1847. 

3. Mary Frances, b. Dec. 16, 1849. 

Mary Munn m. John Lewis, 1734. 

Abner Munson m. Azubah Bronson, d. of 
Josiah, Sept. 24, 1764. 

1. Caleb, b. Jan. 27, 1765. 

2. Sarah, b. Apr. 24, 1767. 

3. Ashbel, b. June 6, 1770. 

4. Aaron, b. June 2, 1772. 

5. Zeba, b. Nov. 16, 1774. 

6. Lucy, b. May 25, 1777. 

7. Hermon, b. Oct. 13, 1781. 

8. Lamberton, b. Mch. 12, 17S4. 

9. Abner, b. Mch. 8, 178S. 

Ashbel Munson, s. of Abner, m. Candis 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP93 



MUNSON. MONSON. 

Spencer, d. of Thomas of Winchester, 
Rich. 15, 179S. 

I. Horatio Lucius, b. i\Ich. 16, 1799. 

Benjamin Munson m. Roxanna Burges, 
June 6, 1775. 

1. Ezra, b. Mch. 31, 1776. 

2. Hannah, b. Oct. 30, 1777. 

3. Milicent, b. June i, 17S0. 

4. Loues, b. July 3, 1781. 

5. Justus, b. Apr. 15, 1784. 

6. Laura, b. Feb. 24, 17S6. 

7. Chary, b. Sept. 14, 1787. 

8. Harvey, b. Sept. 20, 1789; d. Oct. 21, 1790. 

9. Harvey, b. Oct. 20, 1791; d. Sept. 14, 1793. 

Caleb Munson, s. of Caleb of WalUng- 
ford, dec'd, m. Lucy Roberts, d. of 
Gideon, dec'd, May 10, 17S1 [and d. 
1826, a. 80]. 

1. Caleb, b. May 28, 1782. 

2. Cornelius, b. Sept. 12, 1783. 

3. Jose, b. Feb. 16, 1786. 

4. John, b. Nov. 30, 1787. 

5. Harris, b. May 17, 1791. 

6. Polly, b. Sept. 26, 1794. 

7. Lecte, b. May 5, 1797. 

Calvin Munson, s. of Samuel, m. Sally 
Hungerford, Nov. 27, 1794. 

1. Randal, b. Nov. 19, 1795. 

2. Rilmar, b. June 25, 1799. 

3. Lucy, b. Feb. 28, 1801. 

4. Diedamia, b. Apr. 30, 1804. 

Cornelius Munson from Oxford m. Polly 
Welton, d. of Jabez, Sept. 12, 1844, and 
d. Apr. 16, 1S46, a. 25. 

I. Cornelius Welton, b. Sept. 14, 1846. 

Dennis H. Monson of Bethany m. Abby 

A. Thomas, June 14, 1846. 
Elisha Munson, s. of William, m. Mabel 

Homeston, d. of Joy, Sept. 3, 1783 [and 

d. Nov. 22, 1835, a. 79]. 

1. Aaron, b. Oct. 24, 1783. 

2. Laura Elenore, b. June 6, 17S6; m. Daniel Sco- 

vill. 

3. Hannah IMariah, b. June 3, 1789. 

4. Cloe, b. Apr. 9, 1793. 

Emily Munson m. O. H. Bronson, 1S40. 

E. M. Munson of New Haven d. Oct. 5, 
1S41, a. 28.- 

George N. Munson m. Betsey C. Per- 
kins, Apr. 14, 1S47. 

Henry Munson, b. Rlay 21, 1S17, s. of 
Daniel, and Abigail N. Hyde, b. Jan. 
9, 1S17, d. of Obad. of Huntington, m. 
Apr. 20, 1840. 

1. Emily A., b. Aug. 17, 1840. 

2. William Henry, b. L)ec. 14, 1842. 

3. Eliza Ann, b. Au>j. 22, 1S44. 

4. I pair of twins. 

Henry C. Munson of Wallingford m. 
Ellen M. Atkins, Oct. 15, 1844. 

Hermon Monson [s. of Caleb, dec'd] m. 
Ann Bronson, d. of Capt. Joseph, July 
21, 1769. 

I. Molle, b. Apr. 22, 1770; m. J. Clark, Jr. 
Anna, bap. Mch. 16, 1783.* 



Munson. Negus. 

Jesse Munson, s. of Calvin, m. Polly 
Hill, d. of Jared, Dec. 5, 1799. 

1. Eunice Tuttle, b. June 2, 1800. 

2. Lydia Ann, b. June 19, 1801. 

Mary Munson m. Timothy Pond, 1751. 

Mary Munson, wife of Obadiah, late de- 
ceased, d. May 23, 1802.^ 

Sibbel, herdau., m. Samuel Porter. 

Samuel Munson, s. of Daniel, m. Betsey 
Ann Caldwell in Alniira, Portage Co., 
O., Feb. 24, 1840. 

1. Miranda, b. in Ohio, Dec. 8, 1841. 

2. Elizabeth, b. in Ohio, Aug. 21, 1843. 

3. Henry, b. in Ohio, Aug. 16, 1845. 

4. Harriet Ann, b. Mch. 19, 1S47. 

Stephen Munson and Elizabeth: 

I. Daniel, b. Jan. j2, 1786. 

William Munson, s. of William, m. Sarah 
Griggs, d. of Isaac — all of Wallingford 
— Feb. 28, 1753. She d. Aug. 7, 1806, 
a. 74.^ 

1. Isaac, b. July 24, 1754. 

2. Elisha, b. Oct. 10, 1756. 

3. Peter, b. Jan. 20, 1759. 

4. Henian, b. May 29, 1761. 

William Munson: 

Sella and Siha, bap. Jan. i, 1784.2 

Zina R. Murdock m. Harriet A. Bronson 
[d. of Bennet], Dec. 8, 1841. 

John Murphy from the County of Kil- 
kenny, Ire., m. Eustatia Hennessy. 

1. John, b. July 25, 1843. 

2. ftlary Ann, b. Nov. 26, 1844. 

3. Richard, b. Aur. 4, 1S46. 

Thomas Murfee m. Rebeckah Williams, 
Dec. 26, 1783.'' 

Alonzo Neal of Southington m. Polly, d. 
of widow Beecher, Aug. 23, 1827. 

Amos Neal, s. of David of Southington, 
m. Clarissa Payne, d. of David, Mch. 
21, 1799. 

1. Polly, b. Dec. 14, 1799. 

2. Margatana, b. June g, iSoi; d. Aug., 1803. 

3. Gilbert, b. Jan. 16; d. Sept. 2, 1803. 

4. Emma, b. Sept. 25, 1804. 

5. Hiel, b. July 13, 1S06. 

6. Milo, b. Mch. 19, 1808. 

7. Henry Gilbert, b. Oct. 27, 1809. 

8. Margantanah, b. Mch. 11, 1811. 

9. Clarissa, b. Apr. 27, 1812. 
10. Harriet, b. Apr. 15, 1814. 

Andrew Neale m. Abigail Langdon, May 

6, 1844. 
Chester Neal m. Elizabeth Brown, Sept. 

28, 1823. 

Julia Neal m. G. W. Woodin, 1845. 

Leonard Neal m. Julia Grilley, Dec. 17, 

1S21. 
Nancy H. Neal m. R. T. Sanford, 1841. 

Ambrose N. Negus of Litchfield m. 
Sarah Richardson, Dec. 12, 1847. 



94 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Nettleton. Newton. 

Chandler J. Nettleton m. Emily S. Reed 

of Torrino-foril, Jslch. 22, 1840. 
Eli Nettleton and IMary:^ 

Zealous Hotchkiss, bap. Feb. 3, 1822. 
Mary Ann, bap. June 29, 1823. 

Elijah Nettleton and Mary:' 

Xaomi, bap. .Sept. 24, 1797. 
Elijah Edward, bap. Oct. 23, 1803. 

Elijah d. May 17, 1839, a. --j.'^ 
Garry Nettleton:' 

Ann and Wilford Hopkins, bap. July 6, 182S. 

John Nettleton, s. of John of Milford, m. 
Susanah Richards, d. of Lieut. Thom- 
as, Apr. 2, 1750, and d. Nov. 12, 1787, 
a. 60. 

1. John, b. Jan. 18, 1751; d. Sept. 17, 180S. 

2. Sarah, b. July 24, 1753 [m. Sam. Leavenworth, 

s. of Thomas, and d. 1840]. 

3. Susanah, b. Jan. 27, 1756. 

4. Freelove, b. Dec. ig, 1757. 

5. Elizabeth, b. May 27, 1760. 

6. Mary, b. Jan. 30, 1764. 

7. Joseph, b. Nov. 11, 1766. 

John Nettleton, Jr. m. Hannah Hickox 
[d. of Capt. Samnel], June 12, 1777, 
[She d. Aug. 8, 1784]. 

I. Samuel Hickox, b. Mch. 24, 1780. 

Hannah — by second wife — b. Mch. 6, 1788. 

Julia Nettleton m. Chester Hitchcock, 
1835- 

Mary Nettleton m. Eli Baldwin. 

Samuel Nettleton m. Harriet M. Sher- 
man — both of Derby — Oct. 30, 1842. 

Michael Neville m. Ann Delany — both 
from Ireland — in New York, Apr. 16, 
1836. 

1. Timothy, b. June 15, 1837. 

2. Margarett, b. May 24, 1841. 

3. Michael, b. Jan. 24, 1843. 

4. John, b. Jan. 12, 1845. 

5. Matthew, b. Dec. 12, 1846. 

Emeline Newell m. John M. Stocking, 

1834- 
George H, Newel of Southington m. 

Harriet C. Downs, Nov. 12, 1S44. 
Jerusha Newell m. Nathl. Lowree, 1760. 
Bettee Newton m. Samuel Frost, 1755. 
Caroline Newton m. J. E. Bradley, 1824. 
Charles N. Newton, b. May g, iSii, s. of 

Nathan, and Caroline Root, b. Mch. 11, 

1S15, d. of Chauncey, m. Dec. 25, 1836. 

T. Sarah Catharine, b. June 4, 1838; d. 1844. 

Elizabeth Newton m. EliasrClark, iSoi. 

Isaac E. Newton, b. Sept. 14, 1S08, s. of 
Nathan, m. Polly Warner, d. of Oba- 
diah, Oct., 1830. 

1. Mary E., b. July 6, 1832. 

2. Julia Melinda, b. Sept., 1840. 

3. Nathan Herbert, b. Sept. 22, 1842. 

4. Lewis Byron, b. June, 1845. 

Julia Newton m. J. G. Bronson, 1830. 



Newton. Nichols. 

Keziah Newton m. Joseph Wads worth, 
1S41. 

Lucy Newton m. Sheldon Collins, 1S45. 

Miles Newton and Hannah:' 

Miles, John Fowler, and Harriet — the children — 
and Comfort, one of the hou.sehold of Miles 
Newton, bap. June 28, 1801. 

Miles Newton, b. in Oct., 1783, s. of 
Miles, m. Prudence Scott, d. of Simeon, 
Sept. 5, 1S05. 

1. Nathan Fowler, b. July 30, 1806. 

2. Lester Miles, b. Aug. 8, 1809. 

3. Lucius Solindar, b. Aug. 12, 1812; d. Apr. 4, 1816. 

4. Lucius INIyron, b. June 17, 1817; d. June 8, 1825. 

5. Lusett Maria, b. Nov. 27, 1819; d. Aug. 17, 1825. 

6. Jerome, b. June g, 1822. 

7. Edward Linsley, b. Jan. 24, 1826: d. Mch., 1S31. 

Minerva Newton m. J. S. Leavenworth, 

1S24, and J. G. Bronson, 1845. 
William Newton was m. to Mary Gaines 

Leavenworth [d. of Joseph], by Mr. 

Barlow, 1832."^ 
Michael Knee (Ney) m. Sarah Killduff, 

Sept. 3, 1S49. 
Albert Nichols m. Lavinia Kimball of 

Woodbridge, Sept. 11, 1833. 
Benjamin Nichols, s. of Joseph, dec'd, m. 

Elizabeth Prichard, d. of James, dec'd, 

Aiig. 28, 1751. 

1. j\Liry, b. May 16, 1752; m. Amasa Welton. 

2. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 3, 1754. 

Elizabeth d. Oct. 4, 1754, and Benjamin 
m. Rachel Tompkins, d. of Edmund, 
Aug. II, 1760, and d. Dec.,.iS22. 

^. Diene, b. May 3, 1761; d. Jan. 14, 1824. 

4. Milly, b. Sept. 23, 1767: m. Obadiah Scovill. 

5. benjamin, b. July 31, 1770. 

Betsey Ann Nichols m. Edwin Smith, 

1S47. 
Charles Nichols m. Hannah Hull, Aug. 

9, 1S21. 
Clarry Nichols m. Lewis Smith, 1829. 
Clement Nichols, s. of Elijah, m. Molly 

Scovill, d. of Daniel, Feb. i, 1816. 
Edward Nichols, s. of James, b. Aug. 

19, iSoS; m. Aug. 11, 1S33, Alma E 

Grilley, d. of Jeremiah. 

1. .Mary .^nn, b. Jan 13, 1834. 

2. William H., b. Dec. 8, 1836; d. 

3. Charlotte Ann, b. Nov. i, 1838. 

4. Mary E., b. Feb. 13, 1841. 

5. William H., b. Jan. 8, 1844. 

6. James E., b. June 11, 1845. 

Edward Nichols m. Emily A. Blakesley 

June 30, 1S50. 
Elijah Nichols [and Hannah Skeels]:' 

Reiiben, bap. 177-'. 
Hiram, bap. ."Vug. 29, 1773. 

George Nichols, s. of Joseph, m. Susan- 
na Hikcox, d. of Deac. Thomas, Dec. 
15, 1741. He d. Oct. 23, 1788; she, 
Jan. 28, 1790. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



ap95 



Nichols. Nichols. 

1. Ame, b. Aug. 9, 1752 (1742); m. Jas. ScovilL 

2. William, b. Feb. 8, 1744 [m. Sarah Richards, and 
d. in Nova Scotia]. 

3. Lemuel, b. Apr. 13, 1746. 

4. Prue, b. Nov. 8, 1748; d. Aug. 23, 1753. 

5. John, b. Apr. 12, 1751 [grad. at Yale; d. 1815]. 

6. Daniel, b. Apr. 20, 1754. [Went to the British. 

7. Susanna (Prue); m. IJr. Dan. Southmayd. 

8. Mary.] 

George Nichols, s. of Philo, m. Liicinda 
Leach, d. of Alvah of Woodbuv}', Sept. 
6, 1S46. 

I. Charlotte Elizabeth, b. May 25, 1847. 

Hannah Nichols m. David Clark, 1772. 
Humphrey Nichols, s. of Simeon, m. 

Esther Hotchkiss, d. of Stephen, Feb. 

16, 1807. 

1. Harriet, b. Feb. 3, iSio; m. G. A. Hall. 

2. Emeline, b. ^lay 20, 181 1; m. David 'I'errill. 

3. Stephen H., b. Apr. 25, 1813. 

4. Isaac, b. Sept. 29, 1814 [m. Lydia Frisbie]. 

5. William, b. Jan. 27, 1817 [m. M. Atwater]. 

6. Ann, b. Feb. 8, 1819; d. May 12, 1835. 

7. Nancy, b. June 15, 1821 [m. Marvin Hills] . 

8. Eli, b. Sept. 15, 1822 [m. Jane MannJ. 
g. Joseph N., b. Dec. 17, 1824 [m. Lucena Clark]. 

10. Esther, b. Jan. 4, 1827; m. Fred. Holmes. 

II. David H., b. Oct. 14, 1828 [m. H. Williams]. 

Esther d. Oct. 29, 1837, and Humphrey 
m. Phebe I., wid. of Joseph E. Chat- 
field, and d. of Stephen Hotchkiss, 
May 23, 1838. 

12. Franklin, b. Aug. 8, 1842 [d. Sept., 1S48]. 

Isaac Nichols, Jr., m. Marj- Hotchkiss of 

Prospect, Oct. 19, 1S40. 
James Nichols, s. of Joseph, m. Anna 

[wid of Thomas Judd, s. of John], d. 

of Doct. Daniel Porter, dec'd, June 12, 

1740. 

1. Sarah, b. Feb. 2, 1741. 

2. James, b. Dec, 1748. 

James Nichols, s. of Richard, m. Mary 

Selkrig, d. of Nath'l, Oct. 22, 1796. 

[He d. Dec. iS, 1S46: she, Feb. 26, 
1S47.] 

1. Triphena, b. Aug. 10, 1797. 

John Nichols of Middlebury m. Content 
Cande of Salem, Apr. 9, 1827. 

Joseph Nichols [s. of Isaac, Jr., of Strat- 
ford] and Elizabeth [Wood] : 

' I. James, b. on Long Island, June 27, 1712. 

2. George, b. on Long Island, July 14, 1714. 
[3. Elizabeth; ra. Ebenezer Waklee, 1740. 

4. Richard, b. 1720 [chose his uncle, Richard of 
Stratford, guardian]. 

5. Joseph, b. 1724. 

6. Marah. These four probably b. in Derby.] 
8. Isaac, b. May 4, 172Q [went to the British, and 

d. in N. Y., 1776].' 
g. Benjamin, b. INlay 14, 1731. 

[All are mentioned in Probate records.] 

Joseph Nichols dyed Mch. 10, 1733 
(" in' the 47 year of his age," says his 
grave-stone, which, if cijrrect, would 
make the year o£ his birth 16S6, in- 
stead of 1680 as recorded in Strat- 
ford). 



Nichols. Nichols. 

Joseph Nichols, s. of Joseph, m. Tamar 

Bronson, d. of Lieut. John, dec'd, Sept. 

6, 1750. 

1. Symeon, b. Apr. 20, 1751. 

2. Eunice, b. Sept. 6, 1753; m. Michael Bronson. 

Tamar d. Nov. 10, 1755, and Joseph m. 
Anne Webster, d. of John of Farming- 
ton, Dec. 15, 1757. He d. Jan. 24, 
1773- 

3. Leiicy, b. Dec. 5, 175S; m. Luke Adams. 

Joseph Nichols, Jr., s. of Richard, m. 

Mary Winters, Dec. 28, 1772. 

Nabby, bap. June 16, 1776.- 
Isaac, bap. June 6, 1779. 

Joseph Nichols, s. of Simeon, m. Lucy 
Farrell, d. of Benjamin, Dec. 4, 1800. 

1. Miles Chauncey, b. Sept. 2, 1801; d. 1803. 

2. Margaret Ann, b. Aug. 7, 1803 [m. Eliada War- 

ner, 1820]. 

3. Miles, b. Sept. 27, 1805; d. Feb. 8, 1815. 

4. Marcus, b. July 3, 1808. 

5. Merrit, b. Mch. 5, 1811. 

6. Maria, b. Dec. i, 1812 [m. Edmund Holderi]. 

7. Milo, b. Oct. 31 [1814]. 

8. Miles, b. Mch. i, 1817. 

0. jNIary Tamer, b. June 4, 1S22; m. Geo. H. Wel- 

ton. 

Joseph d.'Oct. 27, 1825, a. 49. 
Joseph Nichols m. Betsey Smith, Mch. 

1, 1824. 
Lemuel Nichols :'- 

L'rsula, bap. Aug. 2. 1778. 
Fanny, bap. P"eb. 20, 1780. 

Mahala Nichols m. George King, 1S39. 

Merrit Nichols s. of Joseph, m. Eliza 
beth Andrews, d. of Chauncey of Bris- 
tol, Apr. 25, 1837. 

1. Catharine, b. iSIch. g, 1842. 

2. Henry, b. Aug. 11, 1844. 

Miles Nichols, s. of JosejDh, m. Lydia 
Limburner, d. of John of Oxford, June, 
1839. 

1. Francis, b. Mch. 24, 1S42. 

2. Harriet, li. Mch. 24, 1844. 

Minerva Nichols m. L. W. Scott, 1818. 
Philo Nichols, s. of vSimeon, m. Charlotte 

Parker, d. of Edward D. of Plymouth, 

Oct., iSig. 

1. Edward, b. Nov. 7, 1823. 

2. George, b. Dec. ig, 1825. 

Richard Nichols, s. of Joseph, m. Eliza- 
beth Hikcox, d. of Ebenezer, Aug. 10, 
1744. He d. Apr. 25, 1801; she, Jan. 
21, 1816, a. 95. 

1. IMeriam, b. July 12, i74i;(?) m. Eben Bronson 

[d. July 12, 1812, a. 69]. 

2. Elijah, b. May 14, 1745; d. June, 1843, a. 98.2 

3. Huldah, b. Mch. 8, 1747; m. Joseph Warner. 

4. Tamer, b. Oct. i, 1748; m. Ozias Warner. 

5. Joseph, b. Jan. 16, 1749-50. 

6. Lidda, b. Aug. 16, 1751 [d. Oct., 1839, ^- 88]. 

7. Richard, b. Dec. 8, 1753. 

8. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 13, 1755 [m. — Ames]. 

9. Isaac, b. Feb. g, 1757 [d. with the British, 1776]. 
10. Sarah, b. Apr. s, 1759; m. Timothy Hikcox. 



96 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERS UBY. 



Nichols. Norton. 

11. Samme, b. Apr. 8, 1761. 

12. James, b. Aug. 6, 1764. 

Robert C. Nichols of Woodbury m. 
Phebe Ann Wilkinson of Goshen, Mch. 
16, 1845. 

Samme Nichols, s. of Richard, m. Abi- 
gail Landon of Litchfield, 1783. 

1. Erastus, b. Apr. 14, 1784. 

2. Charley, b. Aug. 12, 1786. 

3. Polly, b. Oct. 24, 1788. 

4. Almira, b. Oct. 14, 1790. 

5. Nabbe, b. Feb. 21, 1793. 

6. Juley, b. July i, 1795. 

7. Erastus, b. June 8, 1798. 

8. Rhoda, b. June 30, 1800. 

g. Richard Olmsted, b. Aug. 8, 1802. 

10. Jesse Landon, b, Oct. 23, 1804. 

11. Harriet, b. Aug. i, 1808. 

12. Harriet, b. Apr. 2, 1810. 

[Samuel Nichols formerly of Wat. d. in 

Cheshire, July 8, 1S56, a. 95]. 
Samuel Nichols of Wolcott m. Charlotte 

M. Wells of Cleveland, Jan. 5, 1851. 
Simeon Nichols [s. of Joseph, 2dJ, m. 

Martha Hotchkiss [of New Haven], 

June 15, 1775. 

1. Joseph, b. Apr. 21, 1776. 

2. Tamar, b. Dec. 25, 1778; m. James Chatfield. 

3. Humphrey, b. Nov. 23, 1781. 
[4. Abigail, b. Mch. 2, 1784. 

5. Chloe, b. July 30, 1786. 

6. Amy, b. Nov. 25, 1788. 

7. William, b. Aug., 1791. 

8. Chauncey, b. Feb., 1794. 

9. Simeon, b. 1796]. 
10. Philo, b. June, 1798. 

Stephen H. Nichols m. Clarissa Atwater, 
at Naugatuck, Mch. 28, 1836. [She d. 
Dec. 29, 1 841, a. 26], and Stephen (of 
Middlebury) m. Emily Payne of Pros- 
pect, Apr. 10, 1S42. 

William Nichols: 

Cn-iirge, Ijap. Apr. 3, 1768.2 

Arthur Nicholson d. Jan. 29, 183'!, a. 39.^ 
John Noble: 

4. Isaac, b. July 29, 1807. 

Thomas Nolan m. Catharine Maloy, July 

7, iS5i.» 
Hannah Norris m. Ashbel Porter, 1762. 
Augusta Northrop m. Marshall Parks, 

1S46. 
Frederick J. Northrop of Watertown m. 

Elizabeth M. Beach, Sept. 20, 1846. 
George Northrop m. Lowly Castle [d. of 

vSamuel], (Jet. 14, 1840. 
Mercy Northrup m. Jeremiah Peck, 1739. 

and Joseph Luddington, 1754. 
Rhoda Northrop m. David M. Prichard, 

1848. 
Sarah Northrop m. Alex. McNeal, 1845. 
Abraham Norton m. Mehitable Doolittle, 

May 14, 1766. 

I. Abraham, b. Nov. i, 1767; d. Apr. lo, 1768. 



Norton. Orton. 

Cyrus Norton d. Dec. 7, 1804.' 

David Norton [s. of Joseph] — Submit 
[Benton], his wife, d. Nov. 17, 1766, in 
her 3Sth year; and David m. Susanna 
Bishop (^f Bolton, Apr. i, 1767. 

David Norton and Polly Norton — both 
from Killingworth — m. in K. 

1. Celia, b. Oct. 12, 1836. 

2. Herman, b. Jan. 11, 1839. 

Janette Norton m. Lyman Smith, 1S24. 
Leonora Norton ra. Harley Downs, 1826. 
Levi Norton of Southington m. Sarah 

B^'ington, Oct. 24, 1842. 
Lucina Norton m. J. T. Vanduzer, 1846. 
Ludenton S. Norton of Plymouth m. 

Luania Bradley, Jan. 13, 1833.* 
Ruth Norton m. Edward Scovill, 1770. 
Susanna Norton m. Rev. LTrial Gridlev, 

1785- 
Zebul Norton, s. of David, ni. Rhoda 

Norton, d. of Beriah of Guilford, June 

12, 17S2. 

1. Friend Congress, b. Sept. 12, 1783. 

2. Augustus, b. June 29, 1785. 

3. Osmyn, b. Aug. 5, 1787. 

Ziba Norton, s. of David, m. Ruth Hop- 
kins, d. of Capt. Isaac, Nov. 26, 1778. 
He d. Feb. 22, 17S1, a. 23, and Ruth m. 
Thomas Welton, 1792. 

I. Philomena, b. Aug. i, 1779 [m. Jared Welton]. 

Moses Noyes m. Marv Prince, Apr. 2, 

1778.^^ 

1. Mary, b. Mch. 23, 1779. 

2. A dau., b. Feb. 13, 1781. 

3. Sclden, b. Apr. 26, 1784. 

John O'Brien m. ]Mary Power — both of 

Wolcottville— Nov. 27, 1849. 
Lucius Odle (Odell), s. of Stephen of 

South Farms, m. Fidelia D. Upson, d. 

of Freeman of Southington, Oct. i, 1837. 

I. Emma Jane, b. Mch. 27, 1840. 

Gershom Olds m. Sibel Mix, d. of Eldad, 
Dec. 15, 1783. 

1. David, b. Jan. 27, 1786. 

2. Eldad, b. Feb. 29, 1788. 

:;. Joel, b. June 13, 1790; d. Mch. 6, 1794. 

4. .Allen Swain, b Apr. 30, 1793. 

5. Orrel Hannah, b. June 16, 1797. 

Maria Olds m. Manly Grilley, 1821. 

Montgomery Olmstead m. Esther Mix of 

New Haven, Sept. 14, 1S23. 

John O'Neil m. Mary Horan, July 6, 

1S49. 
Patrick O'Neill m. Catharine Gorman, 

May 23, 1S48. 
Abigail Orton m. Bronson Hotchkiss, 

1S25. 
Caroline Orton m. W. S. Piatt, 1S44. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP97 



Orton. Osborn. 

Eliada Orton :^ 

John, b. Aug. 6, 1784. 
Lurina, b. Nov. 8, 1786. 

Phebe Orton m. Daniel Hikcox, 1775.^ 
William H. Orton, b. in Litchfield, Mcli. 
23, 1801, m. Louisa Bonghton, d. of 
Jonas, Apr. 12, 1S26, and d. in Seneca 
Co., O., Nov. 20, 1S41. 

I. Mary Jane, b. Apr. 19, 1827; m. W. Tompkins. 

Abraham Osborn, s. of Daniel, m. Eunice 
Johnson, d. of Peter of Derby, Oct. 21, 
1762. 

1. Abraham, b. Aug. 25, 1763. 

2. Andrew, b. June 25, 1765 [m. Sarah, d. Samuel 

Chatfield]. 

3. Ezra, b. Aug. 23, 1767. 

4. Peter, b. May 18, 1769. 

5. John, b. Apr. 28, 1771. 

6. Moses, b. Feb. 16, 1774. 

7. Eunice, b Dec. 3, 1777; m. Jolin White. 
S. Elizabeth, b. ApV. 8, 1780. 

Amos Osborn and Joanna [AVeed, d. of 
John of Derby]: 

2. Amos, 

3. Lucy, b. July 6, 1746. 

4. Amos, b. Sept. 13, 1750. 

5. Elijah, b. Sept. 15, 1752. 

6. Reuben, b. Apr. 8, 1755. 

Amos, s. of Joseph of N. H., dec'd, m. 
Elizabeth Benham, d. of Joshua Hotch- 
kiss of Wallingford, Mch. 25, 175S, and 
d. Nov. I, 1790.^ 

7. Joshua, b. Feb. 18, 1759. 

8. Thaddeus, b. Jan. 28, 1761. 

9. Asahel, b. Apr., 1763. 

10. Arae, b. Jan. 3, 1765. 

11. Samuell, b. Feb. 4, 1768. 

Amos Osborn, Jr., s. of Lieut. Amos, m. 
Lorana Hotchkiss, d. of Isaac of New- 
Haven, May 14, 1776. 

1. Phebe, b. Apr. 14, 1777. 

2. Isaac, b. Jan. 12, 17S1. 

Asahel Osborn, s. of Amos, m. Molla 
Hoadley, d. of Elemuel, Feb. i, 17S7. 

1. Molla, b. Dec. 13, 1787. 

2. Hershall, b. July 10, 1791. 

Ashbel Osborn, s. of Daniel, m. Ruth 
Richardson, d. of Nathaniel, June 9, 
17S5. 

1. Catey, b. Sept. 26, 1785. 

2. Fannj', b. Apr. 9, 1787. 

3. Joseph Richardson, b. June 28, 1790. 

4. Garret, b. May 22, 1792. 

5. Statira, b. iSIay 25, 1794. 

6. Ruth, b. Aug. 8, 1796. 

7. Ashbil, b. July 8, 1800. 

Charlotte Osborn m. Harry Bronson, 

1S39 (who m. f(.)r second wife, in 1S49, 
Charlotte Thompson). 

Daniel Osborn [s. of Joseph of New 
Haven]: 

I. Abraham. 2. Daniel. 3. Ebenezer. 4. Obe- 
dience. 5. Mary; m. Elijah Wooster. 6. 
David. 7. ^lart'ha; m. Jonah Loomis. 8. 
Rachel; m. Samuel Fenn.] 

9. Abigail, d. in Oxford, 1768, a. 16. <> 



Osborn. Osborn. 

Children b. in Waterbury: 

1. (to.) Sarah, b. Oct. 22, 1754; m. Richard Pitts. 

2. (11.) Lida, b. Feb. 27, 1757 [m. George Clark of 

Derby] . 

3. (12.) Eli, I 

4. (13.) Ruth, ! Thrins, b. May i; bap. May 3, 

and I 1759. S 

5. (14.) Lois, J 

Lois d. May 5, Ruth, ]May 19, 1759. 

The mother d. Apr. iS, 1760, and Daniel 
m. wid. Sarah Smith, late of Lyme, 
Feb. 18, 1762. 

15. Ashbel, b. Nov. 3, 1762. 

16. Ruth, b. Apr. 16, 1764; m. Jacob Talmage. 

17. Philo Tomson, b. May 4, 1766. 

Daniel Osborn (2), s. of Daniel, m. Marj- 
Pickets of Derby, Sept. 5, 1764. 

1. Abner, b. Oct. 13, 1765. 

2. Daniel, b. June 24, 1768. 

Daniel Osborn (3), s. of Daniel, m. Eliza- 
beth Gunn, d. of Nathaniel. 

1. Daniel, b. Aug. 22, 1793. 

2. Garry, b. Nov. 4, 1796. 

3. Elizabeth, b. June 25, 1797. 

4. Mary, b. July 14, 1800. 

5. Lotty, b. Dec. 15, 1S02. 

6. Leman, b. Dec. 11, 1810. 

David Osborn, s. of Daniel, m. Barsheba 
Griffen, d. of Matthew of .Simsbury, 
May 26, 1774. 

1. Barsheba, b. Jan. 16, 1775. 

2. David, b. Sept. 12, 1776. 

3. Lyman, b. Aug. 16, 1778. 

Ebenezer Osborn m. Mamie Ward, Apr. 

12, 1769.^ 
Eli Osborn, s. of Elijah, m. Lydia Finch, 

d. of Eleazer, June 10, 1793. 

1. Merit, b. Jan. 30, 1794. 

2. Zina, b. Sept. 20, 1796. 

3. Alma, b. July i, 1799. 

Elijah Osborn: 

4. Eliphalet, b. Dec. 17, 1782. 

Enos Osborn s. of Thomas, Jr., m. Nabby 
Addams, d. of Eli, Jan. 22, 179 — . 

I. Garret, b. July 28, 179 — . 

Esther Osborn m. Jesse Bronson, 1784. 
[Ezra Osborn m. Mercy .^ 

1. Pharos, b. 1792. 

2. Leveret, b. 1794. 

3. Larmon, b. 1795.] 

4. Elizabeth (or Electa); m. Peter Vandebogart, 

1832. 

Jared Osborn m. Freelove Anne Mal- 

lory, June 30, 1777.*' 
John Osborn, s. of Abraham, m. Ruth 

Griffin, d. of Matthew of Granby, Oct. 

14, 17S9. 

1. John Wyllys, b. Oct. 28, 1790. 

2. Abner Erastus, b. Oct. 8, 1792. 

3. Ruthy Harrietta Caroline, b. Aug. 10, 1800. 

Joseph Osborn, s. of Joseph of New Ha- 
ven, m. Hester Mallery, d. of Daniel 
of New Haven, Nov. 11, 1742. 

I. Hester, b. Dec. 10, 1743; m. Nathan Bucking- 
ham. 



98 AP 



BISTORT OF WATERBURY. 



OsiiORN. Painter. 

2. Jared, b. Sept. 24, 1745. 

3. Joseph, b. Dec. 7, 1747. 
Samuel, bap. May 27, 1750.6 
Samuel, bap. Dec. 3, 1752. 
Nabodi, bap. July 27, 1755. 

Esther, w. of Capt. Joseph, d. ]Mch. 21, 
1769, a. 50. « Capt. Joseph m. Mrs. 
Abigail Lyman, Oct. 26, 1769. Capt. 
Joseph m. Mrs. Elizabeth Tomlinson, 
Feb. 13, 1793. 

Joseph Osborn, 3d, m. Sarah Smith, 
Mch. 10, i7S3.>i 

Lavinia Osborn m. John Fairclough, 
'843- 

Lemuel Smith Osborn, s. of Sarah, b. 
Jan. 26, 1779. 

We certify that Lemuel Osborn Smith's 
name was entered upon the records of 
the town of Waterbury by mistake 
Lemuel Smith Osborn.' Whereas it 
was to have been entered Lemuel 
Osborn Smith, by which last name he 
intends, as he has a good right to do, 
to write his name in future. 
March 8, 1817. 

Richard Pitts, 
Sarah Pitts, 
Lemuel O. Smith. 

Lot Osborn m. Thankful Doolittle, d. of 

Abel, dec'd, Jan. 24, 1765. 
Mary Osborn m. James Bellamy, 1740. 
Mercy Osborn m. Daniel Tyler, 177S. 

Moses Osborn of Salem m. Comfort 
Cande of Oxford, Apr. 25, i796.<' 

Obedience Osborn d. Feb. 15, 1813, a. 

72.-^ 

Samuel Osborn, s. of Amos, m. Sally 
Hotchkiss, d. of Benjamin of Wood- 
bridge, Jan. 25, 1797. She d. Oct., 
1817.^ 

Thomas Osborn [s. of Joseph of New 
Haven] d. 1807, a. 91. 

5. Thomas, b. Aug. i, 1757. 

Thomas Osborn, s. of Deac. Thomas, m. 
Hannah Johnson, d. of Israel of Derby, 
May 7, 1777. 

1. Euos, b. Aug. 2, T777. 

2. Comfort, b. May 2, 17S0; m. Andrew Adams. 

3. Anson, b. Nov. 25, 1787. 

4. Thomas Letsum, b. Sept. 2, 1790. 

5. Hilly, b. Dec. 8, 1793. 

Adelia E. Oviatt m. S. M. Cate, 1S39. 
Sarah Page m. John Cole, 1754. 
Sarah Page m. Simeon Peck, 17S8. 
Aurelia Painter m. Norman Terry, 1S42. 
Austin Painter, s. of John of Plymouth, 

m. Betsey Maria Rigby, d. of John, 

Nov. 7, 1S30. 



PINTER. Parker. 

1. Thomas Frederic, b. Nov. i8, 1832. 

2. Mary Jane, b. May ig, 1837. 

3. Emma Jane, b. June 26, 1842. 

George Painter of Watertown ni. Mary 

Perkins, June 26, 1845. 
John Painter and Deborah: 

7. (?) Lot, b. Feb. 9, 1755; d. Feb. 21, 1757. 

5. Eunice, b. at Middletown, Mch 16, i7=;i-2- m 

Nathan Woodward. - /o - ■ 

6. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 7, 1757. 

7. Thomas Welcher, b. Sept. 25, 1760. 
S. John, b. Dec. 25, 1763. 

John Painter m. Sally Watrous, Any- i'; 
1786.^ "^ 

1. Betsey, b. Sept. 19, 1787. 

2. Horsey, b. Feb. 11, 1789. 

Philo Painter of Watertown m. Nancy 
Pardee, July 8, 1S44. 

Sarah Painter m. Benjamin Williams 
1762. 

Susanna Painter m. Abel Ford, 1771. 

Thomas W. Painter m. Lucina Dunbar 

Mch. 28, 1787.-* 

r. Chester, b. Monday, Nov. 19, 1787. 
2. Sarah, b. T'uesday,' Oct. 22, 1789. 

George Palmer from New Haven m. 
Hannah O. Ailing of Salem, Dec. 10, 

iS2r). 

Samuel Palmer and Jerusha fd. of Abr. 
FootJ: 

1. Molly, b. Dec. 10, 1774; d. Sept. 8, 1777. 

2. Abram Foot, b. Aug. 8, 1777. 

3. Ozias, b. July 4, 1780. 

4. Fanny, b. June 3, 1783. 

Silas W. Palmer of Centerville, N, Y. 

m. Mary Ann Porter [d. of Timothy], 

Aug. 22, 1S41. (His name has been 

changed to AriJine.) 
Bolara Pardy m. Henry Smith, 1S22. 
Elizabeth Pardy m. Jonas Hungerford, 

1773- 
Esther Pardee m. George Mansfield, 

i>^34- 
Henry S. Pardee m. Almira Beach of 

Litchfield, July 3, 1S37, who d. Apr. 7, 

1S41, a. 20. 

Jane Pardee m. Alonzo Thompson, 1S45. 

Millecent Pardee ni. Theodore Baldwin, 

1S2S. 

Nancy Pardee m. Philo Painter, 1844. 

Royal B. Pardee of Harwinton m. Eliza 
J. Stevens, Mch. 24, 1S51. 

Aaron Parker [s. of Elisha of Walling- 
ford] and Sarah [Martin]: 

8. Lyman, b. Feb. 20, 1776. 

Abigail Parker m. Abel Austin, 1795. 
Charlotte Parker m. Philo Nichols, 1S19 
Eliab Parker m. Martha Andrews, Feb. 

7, 1759- 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP99 



Parker. Patterson. 

1. Andrews, b. Nov. S, 1759. 

2. Eliab, b. June 20, 1761. 

3. Abigail, b. June 28, 1763. 

4. JNIartha Williams, b. Dec. 20, 1765. 

5. Araariali (son), b. May 11, 1768. 

Eri Parker and Joanna:^ 

John, b. Aug. 12, 178S. 

Hannah Parker m. Stephen Matthews, 

1750. 
Isaac Parker and Anna: 

Anna, b. Dec. 26, 1781. 
Timothy, b. Dec. 6, 1783. 
John Parker, s. of EUsha, dec'd, of Mans- 
field, m. Lydia Castle, d. of Isaac, 
Aug. 13, 1752. 

1. Mary, b. Jan. 11, 1753; m. Matthew Terril.? 

2. Irene, b. Feb. 23, 1755; m. Seth Warner. 

3. Elisha, b. July 22, 1757. 

4. John, b. A"ug. 29, 1759. 

5. Asel, b. Apr. 5, 1762. 

6. Eri, b. Sept. 15, 1764. 

7. Salmon, b. Dec 11, 1767. 

8. Lydia, b. Mch. 16, 1769. 

g. Lusenday (Lucinda), b. Apr. 8, 1771. 

Jonathan Parker m. EHzabeth Adkins, 

Oct. 23, 1766. 
Lent Parker m. Sarah Dunbar, Nov. 9, 

1774.^ 

1. Solomon, b. June 25, 1775. 

2. Samuel, b. Nov. 11, 1777. 

3. Edward Dunbar, b. Dec. 27, 1783. 

4. William, b. Nov. 23, 1788. 

Lois Parker m. Samuel Smith, 1770. 
Reuben Parker, s. of John [of Walling- 

fordj, m. Hannah Chapman, Dec. 10, 

1764. 
Rowena Parker m. J. S. Hall, 1817. 
Samuel Parker d. Dec. 14, 17S5, a. 78.3 
Sarah Parker m. Thomas Merriam, 1783. 
Sarah Parker d. May 18, 183S, a. 83.^ 

Marshall Parks of Amboy, N. Y. m. 

Augusta Northrop of Watertown, Nov. 

26, 1846. 
Wright Parks from Amboy, N. Y., m 

Mary Johnson from Watertown, Nov. 

I, 1834- 

1. William Wright, b. Apr. 16, 1841. 

2. Frederick Johnson, b. Mch. 17, 1S45. 

Hannah Parrott m. Isaac Scott, 1834. 

Harvey A. Parsons of Bristol m. Han- 
nah Scott, Jtme 15, 1828. 

Lewis Parsons of Plymouth m. Lydia 
Streeter, Mch. 26, 1851. 

Charles Partrick of Stamford m. ]ilrs. 
Samantha Hall, Dec. 30, 1832. 

Harvey Patchen of Derby m. Rachel 
Brown of Southbury, Nov. 9, 1828. 

Thomas H. Patten of Boston, Mass., m. 
Melissa Frost, Mch. 6, 1S45. 

Henry Patterson of Fairfield m. Milinna 
Potter, d. of Aaron, Sept. 9, 1831. 



Patterson. Payne. 

John Patterson of Brownville, Me., m. 
Emma A. Camp of Prospect, Oct. 7, 
1849. 

Betsey Payne m. Silas Ives, 1826. 

Clarissa Payne m. Amos Neal, 1799. 

David Payne [brother of Joseph] m. Sub- 
mit Hotchkiss, d. of Capt. Gideon, June 

15, I775-'' 

David Miles and Anna, bap. Nov. 7, 1802. 9 

Edvs^ard Merit Payne m. Sally Hikcox, 
d. of Samuel— both of Salem— Sept. 
19, 1S27. 
Emily Payne m. S. H. Nichols, 1842. 
Esther Payne m. Alonzo Granniss, 1S37. 
Harmon Payne' [s. of Joseph, m. Eliza- 
beth Osborn, Nov. 21, I795]: 

Wyllis, .Alfred, Rebecca, who m. Garry Merrils, 
and Harriet [m. Benj. C. Hall], bap. June 28, 
1801; also Lucy, one of the household of Har- 
mon. 
William Hutton, b. Dec. 4, 1801. 
Sukey Elizabeth, b. Sept. 10, 1804; m. George 

Root 
Huldah Hotchkiss, bap. June 17, 1808; m. Na- 
thaniel Roberts. 
Lois Emeline, bap. Apr. 20, 1810 [m. Marshall 

Prichard, s. of Amos, Jr.]. 
Samuel Osborn, bap. Feb. 13, 1814. 

Harmon Payne [s. of Joseph, Jr.] of 
Prijspect m. Sarah E. Hotchkiss [d. of 
Dyer] of Naugatuck, Sunday, June 11, 
1S43. 

Joseph Pain [b. Nov. 14, i75i] m- Hul- 
dah Hotchkiss, d. of Capt. Gideon, 
Apr. 8, 1773. 

1. Harmon, b. Dec. 9, 1773. 

Huldah d. Mch. 28, 1774. and Joseph 
m. Esther Hotchkiss, Nov. 21, 1774. 

2. Joseph, b. Oct. 13, 1776. 

3. Peter, b. June 13, 1779 [ni. adau.of Rev. ( )liver 

Hitchcock of Columbia. 

Esther d. Feb. 23, 1787, and Joseph m. 
Abigail Alcott, Sept. 26, 1787. 

4. Esther, b. July 23, 1788. 

5. Susanna, b. June 25, 1790; d. Sept., 1804. 

6. Huldah, b. Dec. 6, 1792. '^ 

Abigail d. Jan. 22, 1795, a. 31 yrs., and 
Joseph m. Lois Hotchkiss, d. of Abra- 
ham, June I, 1795- He d. Apr. 25, 
1S05; she, Nov., 1842. 

7. Silas, b. Apr. 19, 1796. 

8. Olcott Hotchkiss, b. Mch. 12, 1798. 

9. Herrick, b. June 12, 1802; m. Patty Frost. 
10. Edward Merrit, b. Oct. 21, 1S04]. 

Joseph Payne, Jr. [m. Jan. 16, 1798, Ruth 
Beecher, b. Aug., 1777, d. of Hezekiah 
of Cheshire. 

1. Julia, b. NoVf. 30, 1798; m. Alfred Stevens. 

2. Maria, b. Oct. 26, 1800. 

3. Joseph Burton, b. Jan. 11, 1803. 

4. Stephen Hotchkiss, b. Dec. 4, 1805. 

5. Edwin Beecher, b. Oct. 30, 1811; d. 1814. 

6. George, b. Oct. 19, 1813. 

7. Edwin B., b. Mch. 20, 1816. 



100 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Paynk. Peck. 

8. Harmon, b. Feb. 23, iSig. 

9. Ruth Elizabeth, b. June 23, 1822. 

Ruth d. Aug. 3, 1S22, and] Joseph m. 

Rebecca Barnes, Nov. 23, 1S23. 
Melissa Payne m. Wm. Eaves, Jr., 1835. 
Nelson Payne of Bainbridge, N. Y., m. 

vSarah C. Adams, May 6, 1833. 

Olcutt Payne and Sally^ [d. of Benjamin 
Becclicr of Cheshire]: 

Lois Amelia and Alford, bap. |an. 20, i82-> 
Au.t:ustus Merit, bap. Dec. 28, "1823. 

Philemon Payne and Roxy:^ 

Stephen Johnson, bap. June 11, 1820. 
William Deforest, bap. June 30, 1822. 

Rebecca Payne m. Asa Hopkins, 17S4. 
Samantha Payne m. Zerah Ford, iSoi. 
Thomas Payne:' 

Hezekiah, Ro.xe, Solomon, and Raphel, bap 

June 6, 1798. 
Thomas Jefferson, bap. May 3, 1801. 
Elizabeth, Ijap. May 13, 1S04. 

Thomas J. Payne, s. of Thomas, m. 
Nancy Frost, d. of Enoch, dec'd, Time 
24, 1S24. 

1. Thomas Miles, b. May i, 1825. 

2. Martin, b. Nov. 29, 1827. 

3. Charles, b. Apr. 10, 1830.' 

4. Alonzo, b. Apr. 5, 1834. 

5. Maria Elizabeth, b. Oct. 8, 1839 

6. , b. Mch. 30, 1847. 

William H. Payne, s. of Hermon, m. 
May 31, 1829, Rebecca F. Hall, b. Aug. 
22, 1S08, d. of Heman of Wolcott. 

1. Hiram Hitchcock, b. Feb. 27; d. Apr., 1830 

2. Helen Augusta, b. Nov. 24, 1833. 

3. Sarali Reliecca, b. Mch. 16, 1840. 

4. Mary Enieritt, b. June 2, 1845; d. Oct., 1S46. 

Deborah Peck m. Reuel Upson, 1766. 

Eleazer C. Peck m. Louisa Marden- 
brough— both of Derb}^— Mch. 4, 1S39. 

Elizabeth Peck m. Ambrose Button 
1754- 

Fanny Peck m. Edward Root, 1S43. 

Francis Peck, b. Sept. 3, 1807, «• of Ben- 
* jamin of Hamden, m. Mch., 1S35, Mary 
Andrus, b. Sept. 8, 1816, d. of Jona- 
than of Simsbur3^ 

1. Ellen, b. in Wallin,t;ford, Auj;. 26, i8j6. 

2. Au.ifusta, b. in VVallingford, Aug. 14, 1840. 

3. Ann Eliza, b. in Hamden, May 13, 1842. 

4. Frank, b. Aug. 16, 1845. 

Gideon Peck and Esther: 

1. Solomon, b. Sept. 17, 1753. 

2. Anis, b. Nov. i, 1755. 

3. Sarah, b. Mch. 24, 1758. 

4. Eunice, b. July 15, 1760. 

5. Gideon, b. Feb. 25, 1763. - 

6. Olive, b. Nov. 5, 1764. 

7. Samuel, b. Jan. 5, 1767. 

8. Lorene, b. 'Nlch. 5, 1769. 

Henry H. Peck of Berlin [s. of Deac. 
Samuel of Kensington] m. Harriet M. 
Cook [d. of Zenas], Aug. 14, 1839. 



Pkck. Pj-ck. 

Horace B. Peck m. Sarah C. Beecher, 

Sept. 29, 1851. 

Huldah Peck m. Anson Sperry, 181 1. 

Mr. Jeremiah Peck, Senr.: 

The Revd Mr. Jeremiah Peck, pastor 
of the Church of Christ in Waterbury 
dyed 7th June in 3'e year 1699. 

Jeremiah Peck, son to the above named 
peck m. Rachel Richards, d. of Oba- 
diah and Hannah, June 14, 1704. [He 
was app. deacon in Northbury, 1739; 
retired, 1746; received to the Church in* 
Oxford, Apr. 27, 1747, and d. in Derby, 
1752]. 

1. Johanna, b. Apr. 12, 1705 [m. Joseph Galpinl. 

2. Jeremiah, b. Nov. 19, 1706. 

3. Rachel, b. May 10, 1709 [m. Ebenezer Riggsl 

4. Anna, b. Mch. 10, 1713; m. lohn Garnsey 

5. Mary, b. Oct. i, 1715 [d. unm. 1753]. 

6. Phebe, b. Jan. 26, 1716-17 [m. Dr. Jonas Weed!. 
7- Ruth; b. Feb. 18, 1718-19; m. Rev. Mark Leaven- 
worth. 

8. Esther, b. June 22, 1721 [d. before 1752] 

9. Martha, b. May 4, 1725; m. Caleb AVeed. 

Jeremiah Peck, s. of (theabove) Jeremiah, 
m. June 14, 1739-40, Mercy Northrup 
[b. Sept. 7, 1715], d. of Samuel of Mil- 
ford. [Nov. 2, 1750, his will was disal- 
lowed, as It gave his wife almost noth- 
ing]- 

1. Esther, b. Nov. 3, 1740 [d. unm ] 

2. Ruth, b. Nov. 28, 1742 [dead in 1768]. 

3. Eunice, b. Feb. 23, 1744-5 [m. D. Mansfield]. 

4. Rachel, b. Jan. 4, 1746-7; d. [in infancy]. 

5. Lemuel, b. Nov. 27, 1748 [d. 1758 1. 

Widow Mercy Peck, her child born of 
her when a widow; name 

Abel, in the year 1752. 

She m. Joseph Luddington, 1754. 

Jeremiah Peck (•«) [b. Jan. 12, 1720-1- s. of 
Jeremiah, {■•) b. 1687 (and Hannah, d. of 
Dr. John Fisk);s. of Joseph, (-') bap. 1653 
(and .Mary, d. of Nicholas Camp); s. of 
Joseph,(') the settler of Milford (and 
Alice, wid. of John Burwell); m. Oct. 
26, 1743, Frances Piatt, d. of Josiah 
Jr., of Milford, and d. Mch. 17, 1786. 
She was b. Feb. 13, 1717, and d. Oct. 
16, 1794. 

1. Jeremiah, b. Nov. 4, 1744. 

2. Content, b. 1747; d. in Wat., Aug. 28, 1775 

3. Isaac, b. 1749; d. Sept 28, 1775. 

4. Simeon, b. Aug. 19, 1752—311 b. in Milford]. 

Children that were b. in Waterbury: 

-!• *Xu"'^°!''i,''- -^'^"- '7i 1755; d. Nov. 28, 1776' 

0. Abigail Piatt, b. May 16, 1757; m. E. Birge 
7. Benjamin, b. Apr. 28, 1760; d. Oct. 24, 1776'. 

Jeremiah Peck, Jr.,(^) s. of Jeremiah (•*) 
m. Jemiah Scott, d. of Sam., Oct 30 
1765- 

1. Sarah Jemima, b. Sept. 27, 1766; d. Sept , 1773 

2. and 3 'J'wins, viz.: two sons, one born the last 

day of December, 1768, named Jeremiah- the 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



APlOl 



Peck. Peck 

other born the first day of January, 1769, and 
the mother died the same day. The last of the 
twins died Jan. 15, 1769; the first died Aug. 21, 
1773- 

Jeremiah m. Lois Bunnell of Oxford, 
Aug. 17, 1769 [and d. Aug. 10, 1835. 
She was b. Oct. 18, 1740, and d. Feb. 
24, 1813]. 

4. Lois Ann, b. Aug. 14, 1772. 

5. Content, b. May 29, 1774; m. I'enoni Barnes. 

Jeremiah Peck [b. Oct. 17, 1793, in Beth- 
any; s. of Samuel, b. 1753; s. of Tim- 
othy, b. 1711; s. of Samuel, b. 1677; s. 
of Joseph, bap. 1647; s. of Henry of 
New Haven], was mar. to Julia Rob- 
erts [d. of Amasa], Jan. 16, 1822, by 
Samuel Potter, Pastor of the Baptist 
Church in Woodbridge and Salem. 

Joshua Peck, youngest son of Rev. Mr. 
Peck, dyed Feb. 14, 1735-6. 

Laura Peck m. George N. Prichard, 
1843. 

Mary Peck m. Jolm Foot, 1769. 

Mary M. Peck m. Lucius Roberts, 1S46. 

Otis T. Peck from Rehoboth, Mass. m. 
Laura Kilborn from New Hartford, 
June, 1830. 

1. Fidelia, b. in Barkhamsted, Jan. 18, 1831. 

2. Wellington, b. in Winsted, Mch. 18, 1832. 

3. Holliston, b. in New Hart., Sept. 26, 1833. 

4. Louisa, b. in Winsted, Aug. 8, 1835. 

5. Carlton, b. in New Hart., Dec. 27, 1837. 

6. Huntington, 1 

and" \h. in N H., Nov. 27, 1839. 

7. Livingston, ) 

8. Thomas Jefferson, b Apr. 27, 1843. 
g. Emogene, b. June 27, 1846. 

10. Mary Jane, b. 

Samuel Peck's wife, Elizabeth, d. Sept. 
27, 1774, a. 68. 

Samuel Peck of Woodbridge m. Esther 
Judd, Jan. 3, 1S02.'' 

Samuel Peck, Esq. of Cheshire m. Har- 
riet Brocket, d. of Giles, Nov. 13, 1822. 

Frederick Brocket, bap. Mch. 14, 1824.8 

Sarah Peck m. Titus Barnes, 1759. 
Simeon Peck, s. of Jeremiah (4), m. Sa- 
rah Merriman, Nov. i, 1781.^ 

1. * Isaac, b. Nov., 1782. 

2. Abigail, b. Jan. 24, 1784. 

3. Benjamin IVIcrriman, b. Dec. 27, 1785 [m. Salina 

At wood]. 

Sarah d. Dec. 21, 1787, and Simeon m. 

Sarah Page, Apr. 23, 1788. 
Susanna Peck m. Stephen Hopkins, 1718. 
Sylvia Peck m. Andrew Hills, 1S41. 
Thankful Peck m. Abner Blakeslee, 1755. 
Treat Peck of Milford m. Marcia S. 

Hickox [d. of Leonard], Nov. 10, 1846. 



Peck. Perkins. 

Ward Peck, s. of Joseph of New Haven, 
m. Dorcas Porter, d. of Capt. James, 
Jan. 22, 17S4. He d. Apr. 8, 1842; she, 
May 12, 1847. 

1. Lucy, b. Aug. 23, 1784; m. Ansel Porter, and 

John Clark. 

2. Roxene, b. Feb. 14, 17S7; m. Andrew Bryan. 

3. Chloe, b. Oct. 31, 1789; m. Noah Bronson. 

4. Lyman, b. Mch. 3, 1792 [m. in the South]. 

5. Sherman, b. May 24, 1794 [m. in the West]. 

6. Harmon, b. Mch. 19, 1796. 

7. Ward, b. Feb. 14, 1799. 

8. Simmons, b. Nov. 25, 1801 [d. unm.]. 

9. William Augustus, b. Aug. 26, 1804. 

10. Dorcas Caroline, b. Dec. 6, 1808. 

11. INIary, b. Apr. 23, 1812; m. Daniel Hitchcock. 

William Augustus Peck, s. of Ward, m. 
Lucretia Leete, d. of George of North 
Haven, Dec. 26, 1S30. 

1. George Lyman, b. Sept. 13, 1832. 

2. William Augustus, b. Sept. 9, 1834. 

3. Eliza Jane, b. July i, 1836. 

4. Caroline Dorcas, b. Sept. 2, 1838. 

5. Sherman Simmons, b. Dec. 14, 1840. 

6. Nancy Ann, h. Oct. 23, 1S43. 

7. James Harvey, b. Dec. 8, 1845. 

James B. Pelton of Wolcottville m. 
Nancy M. Brooks, Aug. 15, 1847. 

William M. Pemberton, b. Apr. 19, 1800, 
and Mary Hall, b. Feb. 23, 1800 — both 
from England — were m. Nov. 12, 1821. 

1. William Henry, b. Aug. 29, 1822; d. Jan., 1827. 

2. Emma, b. Mch. 5, 1824; d. Oct., 1827. 

3. Eliza, b. Nov. 11, 1825; d. Jan., 1827. 

4. Amelia, b. May 16, 1827. 

5. James, b. Nov. 18, 1828. 

6. WiUiam, b. Apr. 0, 1830; d. Jan., 1S38. 

7. Thomas, b. July 25, 1S32. 

8. Alfred Josiah, b. Dec 20, 1S35; d. Sept., 1836. 

9. Samuel Hall, b. Feb. 27, 1837. 

10. Catharine Mary Ann, b. Feb. 16, 1838. 

11. Frederic William, b. Nov. g, 1S40. 
Two children still-born. 

Daniel Pembleton and Elizabeth: 

Gideon Davis, b. Jan. 27, 1772. 

Peter Pendar m. Mary Connelly, Aug. 
28, 1850. 

Joseph Pennell from Brunswick, Me., b. 
Nov., 1812, m. Jan. 12, 1846, Lucy 
Merriam, b. Feb. 22, 1S23, d. of Ed- 
ward S. of Watertown. 

I. Mary Simpson, b. Dec. 19, 1846. 

Alanson Perkins m. Sarah A. Parker, 
Apr. 9, 1837. 

Ame Perkins m. Abel .Scott, 1776. 

Annah Perkins m. E. F. Merrill, iSii. 

Archibald A. Perkins m. Malvina An- 
drews — both of Middletown — Feb. 23, 
1843. 

Burr Perkins, s. of Archibald of Beth- 
any, m. Clarinda Grilley, d. of Silas, 
Dec. 21, 1826. 

I. Frederic Mortimer, b. Aug. 6, 1828. 
2. Franklin Burr, b. July 11, 1831. 



* He was father of Jeremiah, b. Oct. 4, 1805, who was father of the " Peck Brothers " of Northfield. 



103 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



Perkins. Peters. 

3. Frances Augusta, b. Sept. 6, 1834. 
4- Thomas Herbert, b. Sept. 12, 1841. 
5. Julia Antoinette, b. June 16, 1846. 

Charles Perkins, s. of Benoni of Beth- 
any, m. An.w-eline Blakeslee, d. of Pier- 
pont of North Haven, Dec. i, 1S39. 

I. Edward, b. July 12, 1845. 

Edward Perkins and Betsey [d. of Roger 
Peck] from Bethany, 1806:' 

Edward, bap. Sept. 30, 1804 [ni. DeliKht Smith 
of Prospect, and lives in Weymouth, Ohio]. 

Elias Perkins:' 

Aaron Anson, bap. Apr. 11, 1821. 
Emeline Sally, bap. Sept. 26, 1822. 
Lucy, m. H. W. Tomlinson, 1845. 

Elizabeth Perkins m. Ephia Warner, 

1774- 
Jesse Perkins m. Sarah A. Knowlton, 

Dec. 25, 1842. 

Jesse D. Perkins, b. Nov. 17, 1812, s. of 
Jes.se of Bethany, m. Martha Andrews, 
d. of Chauncey of Bristol, Sept. 13, 
1844. 

I. Jessie Charlotte, b. Mch. 24, 1846. 

Martha Perkins m. David Baldwin, 1778. 

Mary A. Perkins m. William Green, 
1S43. 

Mary Perkins m. Geo. Painter, 1845. 

Melissa Perkins m. Julius Hotchkiss, 
1832. 

Nancy Perkins m. Geo. Farrell, 1837. 

Noah H. Perkins from Bethany m. Maria 

Lounsbury, d. of Jesse, June 26, 1839, 

and d. Mch. 10, 1845. 

1. Jame.s Wilson, b. Xug. 3, 1841; d. Apr., 1842. 

2. Mary Maria, b. June 13, 1843.' 

Reuben E. Perkins m. Sarah D. Brown, 
Mch. 27, 1851. 

Rosanna Perkins m. Henry Grilley, i-^)-]. 

Sarah Perkins m. Jacob Sperry, 1773. 

William Perkins and Ruth: 

3. Elias, b. Aug. 4, 1780. 

William J. Perkins, s. of Samuel, m. 
Nancy Bronson, d. of Joseph, June 9, 
1808. 

I. Lodema, b. May 11, iSio. 

William Perkins, s. of Benoni of Beth- 
any, m. Mary Monson, Aug. 11, 1S33. 

I. Elizalieth, b. Dec. 6, 1834. 

Julius Perry and Patty Miranda Carter 
— both of Cornwall — m. Nov. 13, 1836. 

I. Sarah IVIaria, b. Mch. 20, 1S44. 

Seth Perry d. Oct. 7, 1845, a. 38.'-^ 

Oilman W. Persha (?) of Groton, Mass., 
m. Lucmda Talmadge of Oxford, Sept. 
26, 1S49. 

Lemuel Peters, a negro, m. Margaret 
Peter, Sept. 5, 1782. 



Peters. Pierpont. 

1. Annis, b. Mch. 11, 17S3. 

2. llynda, b. Oct. 19, 1786. 

Rev. Amos Pettingill and Hannah: 

Samuel Martin, b. Mch. 8, 1823. 
Hannah Elizabeth, b. June 2, 1826. 

John Phelan m. Bridget ^loran, Feb -^8 

1851. 

Martin Phelan m. Mary Ann McMahon, 
Sept. 15, 1 85 1. 

Aurelia Phelps m. Alvy Hoadley, 1S21. 

Catharine J. Phelps m. Garrv Arnst, 

1S26. 
Harriet Phelps m. Christopher Gray 

1S42. ■ 

David M. Phillips of Bridgeport m. Mary 

Jane Hotchkiss, Oct. g, 1850. 
Jane M. Phillips m. J. M. Seeley, 1846. 
Mary Pickets m. Daniel Osborn, 1764. 
William Pickett from Litchfield m. Sarah 

Howe, d. of Heman from Canaan, Mch. 

8, 1846. 

Stanley, b. May 17, 1846. 

Betsey Pierce m. Calvin Hoadley, 1828. 

Erastus Wheeler Pierce, b. in Wood- 
bury, Sept. 21, 1825, m. Sept. 28, 1845, 
Flora Maria Clark, d. of Asahel. 

I. Erastus Eugene, b. Jan. 25, 1846. 

Austin Pierpont, s. of Ezra, m. Sally 
Beecher, d. of Enos, Feb. 20, 1812. 

1. Enos Austin, b. Mch. 24, 1813; d. Jan. 9, 1814. 

2. Enos Augustus, b. Jan. 8, 1815. 

3. Ezra Alonzd, b. Dec. i, 1S17. 

4. Sarah Minerva, b. Mch. 2, 1820; d. Sept. 24, 

1840. 

5. Nancy Jennet, b. Mch. 24, 1822; d. Dec. 28, 1825. 

6. Charles Joseph, b. Mch. 11, 1825. 

7. Emily Jennett, b. June 15, 1830; m. A. J. Beers. 
S. William Seabury, b. June 23, 1833. 

9. Ellen Maria, b. June 10, 1840. 

Sally d. Dec. 20, 1846, and Austin m. 
[Mrs.*] Emily Sperry of Bethany, May 

19, 1847. He was killed by lightning, 
June 25, 1848. 

Charles J. Pierpont, s. of Austin, m. 
]\Iary Anna Warner, d. of Jared, Apr. 

20, 1846. 

I. Jared (C. J.\ b. Feb. 9, 1847. 

Enos A. Pierpont, s. of Austin, m. Ann 
Moss, d. of Moses of Cheshire, Oct., 

1837- 

1. David Watson, b. Jan. 3, 1838. 

2. Sarah Ann Jennet, b. Apr. 8, 1842. 

3. Eunice Abiah, b. July 22, 1S45. 

Ezra Pierpont and Mary [d. of Isaac 
Blakeslee— both from North Haven]. 
She d. Sept. 28, 1827; he, Jan. 7, 1842, 
a. 84.- 

1. Cloe, b. Aug. 15, 1783. 

2. Luther, b. Feb. 8, 1785. 

3. Seabury, b. Mch. 13, 1787. 

4. Austin, b. May 19, 1791. 

5. Lucy, b. July 26, 1793 [d. unm.]. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP103 



PlERPONT. PlATT. 

Luther Pierpont, s. of Ezra, m. Delia 
Maria AVaui^li, d. of Tliadeus of Litch- 
field, June 6, 1S14. 

1. William Henry, b. Apr. 23, 1815. 

2. James Edward, b. Feb. 18, 1817. 

3. Chloe IVIaria, b. Mch. 13, 181Q. 

4. Emily Cordelia, b. Feb. 3, 1821; d. 1828. 

5. Henry Stiles, b. Mch. 8, 1S27. 

6. Emily Jane, b. Jan. 25, 1832. 

Rufus Pierpont of New Haven m. Har- 
riet Richards [d. of Luther Abijah of 
Vermont], Sept. 14, 1S47.* 

Seabury Pierpont, s. of Ezra, m. Clorana 
Hall, d. of Jared of Cheshire, dec'd, 
Dec. 16, 1S13, and d. Mch. i, 1S29. 

1. Harriet Loisa, b. Sept. 25, 1814. 

2. Mary Selina, b. i\Iay 15, 1817; m. Jos. Welton. 

3. Lucy Sabrina, b. Mch. i, 1820; m. O. Shepard- 

son. 
4 Harriet Maria, b. June iq, 1827; m. A. Bradley, 
Jr. 

Benjamin Pitcher m. Jerusha Welton, 
Oct. 29, 1777.^ 

1. Lois, b. Oct. 14, 177S. 

2. Truman, b. June 19, 1780. 

3. Leveret, b. Mch. 23, 1782. 

4. Rusha Hill, b. Oct. 15, 1785. 

Minerva E. Pitkin m. Seymour DooHttle, 

1S46. 
Richard Pitts m. Sarah Osborn, d. of 

Daniel, Dec. 2, 17S4. 

1. Betsy, b. July 17, 1785. 

2. Nancy, b. Sept. 17, 1790. 

3. Sally, b. Oct. 24, 1792. 

Abbyrilla Piatt m. H. A. Porter, 1S31. 
Alfred Piatt, s. of Nathan, m. Irena 

Blackman, d. of Niram of Brookfield, 

June 8, 1814(1816?). 

1. Niram B., b. Sept. i, 1S18. 

2. Charles S., b. July 30, 1820. 

3. William Smith, b. Jan. 27, 1822. 

4. Clark JNIurray, b. Jan. i, 1824. 

5. Alfred Legrand, b. June i, 1825. 

6. Seabury Blackman, b. Oct. 5, 1828. 

Almon Piatt, s. of Nathan, m. Alvira R. 
Ailing, Mch. 5, 1S17 [who d. Mch. 12, 
1837]. 

1. Albert, b. Dec. 24, 181Q. 

2. Martha S., b. Mch. 6, ^822. 

3. Mary J., b. June 25, 1824 [m. Junius Brown]. 

4. Sarah Elizabeth, b. Aug. 24, 1827. 

5. Ely, b. Mch. 4, 1830. 

Benjamin Platt» [s. of Isaac of Milford, 
and Nancy Bristol, d. of Nathan, m. 
1802]: 

Mary Ann, Benjamin, Nancy, Henry Peck, and 

Adelia, bap. Dec. 29, 1816. 
Jane Eliza, bap. May 12, 1822. 

Daniel Piatt" [s. of Isaac of Milford, and 
Betsey Higby, d. of Samuel, m. 1S04]: 

Charles Harvey, Hannah, Daniel, Martha Ann, 
Elizabeth, Abigail Gunn, and Isaac Riley, 
bap. Oct. 28, 1821. 

Willis, bap. Apr. 6, 1823. 

Divine Piatt [s. of Enoch] m. Emily 
Bronson, Oct. 25, 1S30. 



Platt. 



Plumb. 



Elisha Piatt" [s. of Isaac of Milford] and 
Marcia: 

George, and Robert Hotchkiss, bap. Dec. 2, 

1821. 
Julia Ann, bap. May 18, 1823. 

Ely Platt [s. of Almon] m. Frances E. 
Harrison, Sept. S, 1.85 1. 

Enoch Platt, Jr., s. of Enoch [who was 
b. Nov., 1769], m. Sally Bronson, d. of 
Joseph, 3d, of Prospect, Sept. 24, 1826. 

1. Sophia, b. July 11, 1827; d. Sept. 36,^845. 

2. Sylvester, b. Aug. 20, 1829. 

3. Sephrona, b. July 25, 1831. 

4. Susan Maria, b. Feb. 3, 1834; d. Apr., 1836. 

5. Deloss, b. Feb. 26, 1836. 

6 Susan F., b. May q, 1S38; d. Feb. 20, 1840. 

7. Eldridge B., b. Nov. 23, 1842. 

8. Adelah Emogene, b. June 4, 1846. 

George C. Platt of Prospect m. Frances 

A. Smith, May 13, 1S40. 
Gideon Platt, s. of Gideon, m. Hannah 

Clark, "d. of Joseph— all of Milford— 

Mch. 17, 1783. 

1. Gideon, b. Dec. 19, 1784. 

2. Joseph, b. Oct. 5, 1786; d. Nov. 25, 1792. 

3. Merrit, b. Sept. 12, 1790. 

Deacon Gideon of Middlebury m. Mrs. 
Hannah Newton, Nov. 22, 1S25. 

Gideon Platt, Jr., s. of Gideon (above), 
m. Lydia Speny, d. of Capt. Jacob, 
Nov. 8, 1807. 

Joseph Platt" [s. of Capt. Joseph of Mil- 
ford, m. Martha Miles, d. of David, 
I 801]: 

David Miles, Elizabeth Martha, Joseph, and 

Charlotte, bap. Apr. 3, 1808. 
Nathan, bap. Oct. 22, 1S09. 
Catharine, bap. Apr. 5, 1812. 
Nancy Spencer, bap. Nov. 28, 1819. 

Leonard Platt, s. of Nathan, m. Clarissa 
Hosmer from jMiddleton, N. H., Mch., 
1826. 

1. Clarissa Relief, b. in Mid., Nov. 9; d. Dec, 1828. 

2. Henry Bellows, b. in Dansville, Vt., Apr. 13, 

1830. 

3. Ann Maria, b. Dec. 18, 1833. 

4. Richard Josiah, b. Nov. 15, 1842. 

5. George Leonard, b. June 14, 1846. 

Nancy Platt m. Israel W. Russell, 1818. 
Nathan Platt [b. Mch. 1, 1761, eldest s. 

of Josiah of Newtown] m. Charlotte 

Dickerman of Woodbridge, July 27, 

1829. 
Niram B. Platt, s. of Alfred, m. Eliza 

Kirtland, d. of Wheeler of Woodbury, 

Sept. 17, 1840. 

1. Frances Eugenia, b. Mch. 28, 1842. 

2. Margarett Phebe, b. Sept. 5, 1843. 

3. Charles Kirtland, b. Oct. i, 1846. 

Sybel Platt m. Mansfield Thomas, 1S23. 

William S. Platt [s. of Alfred] m. Caro- 
line Orton [d. of William], Oct. i, 1844. 

Elizabeth Plumb m. Samuel Hikcox, 
1690. 



104AP 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



PoMEROY. Porter. 

Jerusha Pomeroy m. Dr. W. W. Rod- 
man, 1S44. 

Bartholomew Pond, s. of Philip of Bran- 
ford, m. Luse Curtis, d. of Daniel, 
Sept. 9, 1755. 

1. Beriah, b. Aug. 10, 1757. 

2. Ire, b. Nov. 27, 1759. 

3. Content, b. Nov. 23, 1761. 

4. Zera, b. Nov. 24, 1763. 

5. Sala, b. Mch. 20, 1766. 

6. Rebeckah, b. June s, 1768. 

7. Lucy, b. May 10, 1770. 

8. Jesse, b. July 17, 1772. 
g. Samuel, b. Jan 24, 1775. 

Betsy Pond m. Edmund Kellogg, 1S21. 
Luke Pond m. Augusta Briscoe, Sept. 5, 

183S. 
Maria Pond m. David Beecher, 1S25. 
[Phineas Pond d. 1750, leaving, 

I'hincas, Jonathan, Abi.tfail and Martha]. 

Timothy Pond, s. of Philip of Branford, 
m. Mar)' Munson, d. of Abel of Wal- 
lingford, June 19, 1751. 

1. Bartholomew, b. June 7, 1754. 

2. Barnabas, b. Oct. 29, 1755. 

3. Thankful!, b. Feb. 16, 1757 [m. Bronson Foot, 

May 7, 1782]. 

4. Timothy, b. Aug. 3, 1758. 

5. Sary, b. Feb. 21, 1760. 

6. Mary, b. June 8, 1761. 

7. Munson, b. Dec. 17, 1762. 

Mary d. Jan. 16, 1763, and Timothy m. 
Sarah Bartholomew, Aug. 30, 1764- 

8. Jerusha, b. June 24, 1765. 

9. Lydia, b. Apr. 29, 1767. 

10. Ade, b. Apr. 7, 1770. 

11. Isaac, b. Apr. 2, 1772. 

12. Lowly, b. Oct. 20, 1774. 

13. Dill, b. Sept. I, 1778. 

14. Munson, b. Nov. 26, 1780.8 

Maria Pope m. C. C. Adams, 1S18. 
Abigail Porter m. Peter Welton, 1739. 
Abigail Porter m. E. W. Hoadley, 1S23. 
Agnes Porter m. Robert Swan, 1S42. 
Amanda A. Porter m. Wm. Baily, 1S35. 
Ansel Porter, s. of Col. Phineas, dec'd, 

m. Lucv Peck, d. of Ward, Apr. 13, 

1S07. 

1. Phineas, b. Jan. 18, 1808 [d. 1808]. 

2. Ansel Charles, b. Nov. 16, 1811. 

Ansel d. Oct. 9. 1S13, and Lucy m. John 
Clark. 
Arbi Porter [s. of Joseph of Ezra, m. 
Atlanta Scott]. 

Julia A. B., bap. Oct. 6, 1822. 

Asa Porter, s. of Ebenezer (of Daniel) 
m. Deborah Tuller, Oct. 22, 1765. 

1. Asa, b. June 6, 1767. 

2. Climena, b. Jan. 8, 1770; m. Sam. Frost. 

Ashbel Poiter, s. of Capt. Thomas, m. 
Hannah ^Morris, d. of John of Staten 
Island (Branford ^;'(?,r^(^), Nov. 24, 1762. 

1. Sibbel, b. Aug. 21, 1764. 

2. Ashbel, b. Nov. 16, 1766. 



Porter. Porter. 

3. Lynas, b. Jan. 16, 1769. 

4. Hepzibeth, b. Jan. S, 1771. 

Benjamin Porter's wid. Sarah m. Ed- 
mund Scott, 16S9. 

Bildad Porter:^ 

Liva, bap. July 26, 1801. 

Charlotte Porter m. Aaron Benedict, 
1808. 

Daniel Porter (2) [b. Feb. 2, 1652, s. of 
Dr. Daniel (1), m. Deborah Holcomb]. 
He d. Jan. 18, 1726; she, May 4, 1765 
[a. 93]- 

Apr. I. Dauiell, b. Mch. 5, 1699 (d. a. 76). 
14, 2. James, b. Aprill 20, 1700 (d. a. 86). 
170^. 3. Thomas, b. Aprill i, 1702 (d. a. 95). 

4. deborah, b. Mch. 6, 1703-4; m. James Bald- 

win [and d. in Wat., Jan., 1801, a. 07]. 

5. ebenezer, b. Dec. 24, 1708 (d. a. 95). 

6. Ann, b. Apr. 28, 1712; m. Thomas Judd and 

James Nichols [was living in 1801] . 

Daniel Porter (3), s. of Doct. Daniel, dec'd, 
m. Hanna Hopkins, d. of John, June 

13, 1728. 

1. Preserved, b. Nov. 23, 1729. 

2. [Dr.] Daniel (4), b Mch. 8, 1731 [d. of small-pox 

at Crown Point, 1759, unm.]. 

3. Hannah, b. June 16, 1733; m. Obadiah Scovill. 

4. I Dr.] Timothy, b. June 19, 1735. 

5. Susanna, b. July 7, 1737; m. Daniel Killum, and 

John Cosset. 

6. Anna, b. Dec. 6, 1738; in. David Bronson. 

Hanna d. Dec. 31, 1739 [and Daniel m. 
Joanna , and d. Nov. 14, 1772. 

7. Klizabeth; ni. Ard Warner, 1764. 

8. Jemima; m. Timothy Scovill, 1762]. 

[Daniel Porter, s. of Dr. Timothy of Dan- 
iel, m. Ana Ingham, grand dau. of Is- 
rael Clark of Southington, June 9, 17S9. 

1. Horace, b. Sept. 30, 1790. 

2. Timothy, b. Jan. 30, 1792. 

3. Elias, b. May 14, 1795. 

4. Alma Anna, b. Apr. 12, 1800; m. Wm. Orton. 

5. Dr. Daniel, b. May 20, 1805. 

6. Joseph, b. July 11, 1807; d. 1812]. 

Daniel m. Mrs. Leve J. Johnson, Feb. 
I, 1 .834. 
David Porter, s. of James, m. Esther 
Hopkins, d. of Deac. Timothy, Dec. 7, 
1775. [He d. Apr. 4, 1826; she, Sept. 
27, 1S31, a. 78]. 

1. Silas, b. Oct. 21, 1776. 

2. William, b. Mch. 18, 1782. ' 

3. David, b. June 22, 1783. 

Denman C. Porter [s. of Jesse] m. Han- 
nah C. Porter [d. of Horace], Dec. 11, 

1831. 
Ebenezer Porter, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m. 
Marcy Hull, d. of John of New Haven, 
Nov. 14, 1739. [He d. Apr. 5, 1S04, a. 
97]- 

1. Lydia, b. Apr. 9, 1741; m. Abel Beecher. 

2. Asa, b. Aug. 7, 1743. 

3. A son, b. in 1745 and lived one hour. 

4. Marcy, b. June 14, 1749; d. Dec. 2, 1772. 

Ebenezer Porter, s. of Capt. Samuel, was 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



Ap 105 



Porter. 



Porter. 



mar. to Sarah Beebe, d. of Ephraim, 
by Samuel Lewis, Jus. of Peace, Aug. 
31, 1774 — and d. Aug. 22, 1810.^ 

1. Daniel, b. Aug. 26, 1775. 

2. Asa, b. Jan. 26, 1778. 

3. Samuel Ebenezer, b. July 20, 1782; d. Aug. i8io.5 

4. Ezra, b. May 27, 1785. 

5. Oliver, b. Apr. 6; d. May 13, 1787. 

6. Aaron, b. and d. Feb. 23, 1790. 

Rev. Edward Porter, s. of Deac. Noah, 
m. Dolly Gleason, d. of Isaac — all of 
Farming-ton — Nov. 26, 17S9 [and d. 
1S2S]. 

1. Maria Belinda, b. Mch. 4, 1795. 

2. Edward Lewis, b. Feb. 10, 1797. 

3. Isaac Gleason, b. June 29, 1806. 

4. William Robert, b. July 26, 1808. 

[Edward Jones Porter, b. July 23, 1807, 
s. of vSamuel, b. 1784, s. of Levi Good- 
win and Catharine (Jones), m. 1S29, in 
Plymouth, Eliza S. Ball, d. of Timothy. 

1. Helen Finette, b. in Bristol, June 23, 1831. 

2. Franklin Edward, b. June 13, 1833. 

3. Harriet Eliza, b. July 29, 1838.] 

Elias Porter, s. of Daniel, m. Jan. 22, 
1817, Alma Tyler, b. Dec. 17, 1792, d. of 
Lyman of Prospect. 

I. James, b. Mch. 26, i8i8. 

Esther Porter m. Edmund Austm, 1820. 
Ezekiel Porter [s. of Ezra] m. Eliza- 
beth Horton, Oct. 25, 1786.'' 

Francis Porter [s. of Ezra] m. Rosanna 
Warner, d. of Stephen, June 25, 1777.'' 

Harriet A. Porter m. Daniel Sackett, 
1S26. 

Henry A. Porter m. Abbyrilla Piatt, 
Aug. 7, 1S31. 

Horace Porter, Jr., s. of Daniel, m. Han- 
nah Frisbie, d. of Eben., May 20, 181 1. 

1. Horace Clark, b. Mch. 9, 1812; d. Aug., 1S31. 

2. Hannah Charlotte, b. 'Sept. i, 1813; m. D. C. 

Porter. 

3. Hamlet Chauncey, b. July 11, 1815; d. Aug., 

1834. 

4. Hobart Charles, b. Feb. 2, 1819 [m. Jerusha 

Bronson, d. of Benjamin]. 

5. Henry Clinton, b. Apr. 20, 1825 [m. Eliza Betts]. 

Hannah d. Apr. 11, 1844, and Horace 
ni. Esther Merriam Wetmore Hull, d. 
of Benjamin and Elizabeth, Nov. 23, 
1845- 
Isaac Porter, s. of Dr. Preserved, m. 
Amarilla Hikcox, d. of Joel, Nov. 13, 
1799. 

1. Sarah Gould, b. Apr. 26, 1800. 

2. Preserve Hikco.x, b. Sept. 9, 1803. 

[Dr.] James Porter, s. of Daniel, dec'd, 
m. Dorcas Hopkins, d. of John, dec'd, 
Aug. 22, 1733. She d. June 26, 1750; 
he, Mch. 20, 1785. 

1. Hulda, b. Dec. 8, 1733; m. Joseph Fairchild and 

David Taylor. 

2. James, b. Nov. 19, 1737. 

3. David, b. May 11, 1746. 



Porter. Porter. 

James Porter, Junr., s. of James, m. Lu- 
cy Bronson, d. of Josiah, Nov. 9, 1762. 

1. Jesse, b. June 25, 1763. 

2. Dorcas, b. June 10, 1766; m. Ward Peck. 

3. A son, b. and d. Nov. 22, 1768. 

4. James, b. Aug. 3, 1772. 

Lucy d. Oct. 14, 1776, and James m. 
Mary Gambel, Apr. 23, 1778. 

5. Mary, b. Aug. 2, 1779. 

6. Reuben, b. Oct. 24, 1780. 

7. Melinda, b. Aug. 6, 1783 [m. Charles Bough- 

ton]. 

8. Clarenda, b. Oct. 15, 1789. 

9. Josiah, b. Aug. 30, 1792. 
10. Samuel, b. Dec. 28, 1793. 

James Porter, s. of Elias, m. Sophia 
Beecher, d. of Benj. B. of Prospect, 
June I, 1S45. 

I. Emily Jane, b. June 23, 1846. 

[Dr.] Jesse Porter, s. of Dr. Preserve, 
m. Comfort Camp, d. of Chauncey of 
Washington, June 6, 180S. 

1. Denman C, b. May 22, 1810. 

2. Sally Ann, b. May 6, 1812; m. Lewis Hotchkiss. 

3. Adelia, b. Apr. 15, 1815; m. D. T. Law. 
[4. Preserved G., b. Jan. iS, 1822.] 

John Porter, s. of Deac. Timothy, m. 
Phebe Curtis of Wallingford, Nov. 7, 
1770. 

Joseph Porter, 2d, s. of Timothj-, m, 
Jan. 26, 1840, Charlotte Ann Tompkins 
of Florence, N. Y., d. of Eber of Ply- 
mouth. 

1. Celinda Jane, b. June 25, 1842. 

2. Elinor Medora, b. May 24, 1845. 

3. Larry Adolph, b. Dec. 19, 1846. 

Joseph Porter of Salem d. June, 1820.^ 

Joshua Potter, s. of Daniel of Richard, 
m. Elizabeth Burnam, d. of Thomas of 
Hartford, June 7, 173S. 

1. [Esther] b. Aug. in 1740; m. Wm. Hoadley. 

2. [Hepsibah] b. Apr. in 1744; m. Thomas Young 

[had a dau. who m. Cheney, whose dau., 

^Iary, m. Horace Greely]. 

3. [Ann] b. Feb. in 1752 [m. Sam. Burnham of 

Hartford, and had a son. Porter]. 

Joshua d. May, 1755. [Elizabeth m. 
Skinner, and d. 1805, a. 83.] 

Lemuel Porter' [and ^largatana Welton, 
d. of Ard. They were adm. to the 
church 1809, and dis. to Talmage, O., 
Aug. 30, 1818. He was chosen deacon, 
Apr. 4, 1811]: 

Elizabeth and Simeon Colton, bap. Sept. 29, 

1S09. 
Lucy, bap. Dec. 2, 1810. 
Eniela, bap. Aug. 2, 1812. 
Samuel Lewis, bap. Apr. 17, 1814. 

Marah Porter m. Thomas Richards. 

Mark Porter m. Abiah Perkins, Mch. 4, 
1771. 

Mary Porter m. Eliiahas Scott, 1776. 

Nathan Porter [s. of Ezra] m. Prue 



106 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



PORIER. 

[She a. July, 



Porter. 
Lewis, Apr. 12, iTjt.'' 
1806; he, Jul}', 1814. 

1. Clar'ssa, b. 1777; ni. Daniel Beecher. 

2. Lucretia, b. 1779; m- Reuben Warner. 

3. Henry H., b. .1780; m. Sally Lewis. 

4. Fanny, b. 1788; m. Abr. Fowler, U. S. A.] 

[Philander Porter, s. of Levi Goodwin, 
m. Orra Bronson, d. of Deac. Daniel. 

Esther, b. June 26, 1812. 
Daniel Augustus, b. Feb,, 1814. 
Maria, b. Sept., 1816. 
Charles, b. 1823. Mary, b. 1825.] 

Phinehas Porter, s. of Capt. Thomas, m. 
Esther Clark, d. of Thomas, dec'd, July 
12, 1770.1 

1. Esther, b. Mch., 1772; m. Levi Beardsley. 

Esther d. Mch. iS, 1772, and Major 
Phineas m. Alilliscent Lewis, wid. [of 
Isaac Booth and d. of Jonathan Bald- 
win], Dec. 23, 177S. He d. Mch. 9, 
1804. 

2. Orrisina, b. Nov. i, 1779; d. July 8, 1781. 

3. Sally, b. Feb. 20, 1782. 

4. Ansel, b. Aug. 2, 1784. 

5. Orlando, b. May 3, 1787 [m. Olive, d. of Samuel 

Frost], and d. Jan. i, 1836. 

6. Betsey, b. Apr. 14, 1790; ni. Zenas Cook. 

Polly Porter m. Lewis Williams, iSoi." 
[Dr.] Preserved Porter, s. of Daniel, m. 

Sarah Gould, d. of Job of New ililford, 

Apr. S, 1764. 

1. Hannah, b. Nov. 10, 1766; m. Jos. Bronson. 

2. Lavinia, b. July 21, 1767 [m. Dr. Jos. Porter]. 

3. Isaac, b. July 3, 1770; d. June 25, 1772. 

4. Isaac, b. Mch. 27, 1774. 

5. Jesse, b. Oct. 31, 1777. (All bap. at St. James.) 

Sarah d. Nov. 25, 1779, and Preserved 
m. Lj-dia (wid. of Thomas) Welton, 
Dec. 9, 1781. He d. Oct. 23, 1S03; she, 
Oct., 1821, a. 92. 
[Dr.] Richard Porter [b. Mch. 24, 1658, 

s. of Dr. Daniel] m. Ruth , who 

d. Jan. 9, 1709-10. 

[i. Daniel, of Simsbury, 1721-26.] 

2. Joshua, b. Aug. 7, 1688; d. Nov. 19, 1709. 

3. Mary, b. Jan. 14, i6qo-i [m. Northrop]. 

4. Ruth, b. Oct., 1692 [m. Cossett]. 

5. Samuel, b. Mch. 30, 1695. 

6. Hezekiah, b. Jan. 29, 1696-7; d. Aug., 1702. 

7. John, b. June 11, 1700 [went to live with Deac. 

Clark, Nov. 30, 1730]. 

8. Timothy b. Dec. 21, 1701. 

9. Hezekiah, b. July 27, 1704 [was of Woodbury, 

^ 1749]- 

[Joshua, Richard, and Lydia who m. Dan. Par- 
dee of New Haven, are ment. in his will of 
1740, also wife Sarah. j 

Samuel Porter (i), s. of Richard, m. 
Mary Bronson, d. of John, May 9, 1722. 
[He d. 1727], and Mary m. John 
Barnes. 

1. Samuel, b. Dec. 24, 1723. 

2. Luse (Lucy), b. Oct. 12, 1725. 

Samuel Porter (2), s. of Samuel, dec'd, 
m. Mary Upson, d. of Stephen, Dec. 9, 
1747. She d. Mch. 23, 17S0; he, Jan. 8, 
1793- 



Porter. Porter. 

1. Ebenezer, b. Jan. 24, 1749-50. 

2. Jemima, b. Nov. 13, 1752; m. Reuben Bronson. 

3. Samuel, b. Oct. 7, 1755. 

Samuel Porter, Jr. (3), s. of Capt. Samuel, 
m. Sibbel Munson, d. of Obadiah, Jan. 

28, 1778. 

1. Lucy, b. Nov. 14, 1778. 

2. Eunice, b. Mch. 23; d. May i, 1780. 

3. Stephen, b. Sept. 22, 1781 [grad. at Dartmouth, 

1808; preached at Geneva, N. Y.]. 

4. Obadiah, b. July 24, 1783. 

5. Azubah, b. July 6, 1785. 

6. Marshall, b. June 4, 1788. 

7. Samuel Munson, b. May 16, 1790. 

8. Sheldon, b. Mch. 31, 1792. 

Sybbel d. Feb. 5, 1794, and Samuel m. 
Lucy Bronson, d. of Deac. Andrew, 
Nov. 22, 1795. 

9. Lorrain Bronson, b. Sept. 8, 1799. 
10. Leonard, b. July 23, 1802. 

Samuel Porter was m. to ]\Iarv Lowere, 
Sept. 13, 1830, by William A. Curtiss, 
Presbyter of the Prot. Epis. Ch. in the 

United States. 

Samuel Porter from Milford m. Minerva 
Beach, d. of James of Litchfield, Jan. 
16, 1842. 

1. Wales, b. May 30, 1844. 

2. Frances Laduska, b. Jan. 26, 1847. 

Silas Porter, s. of David, m. Polly 
Strong, d. of Benjamin of Southbury, 
Dec. 21, 1.802. 

1. Edwin, b. Feb. 25, 1804. 

2. Esther, b. June 8, 1806. 

Simeon Porter, s. of Capt. Thomas, m. 
Lucy Lewis, d. of Deac. Samuel, June 
28, 1770. 

I. Hannah, b. Mch. 28, 1771. 

Thomas Porter, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m. 
Mary Welton, d. of Stephen, dec'd, 
Dec. 7, 1727 [and d. Jan. 28, 1797, a. 
95]- 

1. Sarah, b. Sept. 24, 1728; m. Enoch Scott. 

2. Ashbel, b. Feb. 2, 1729-30. 

3. Mary, b. Jan. 5, 1731-2; m. Joel Sanford. 

4. Eunice, b. Apr. 19, 1734 [d. unm.]. 

5. Thomas, b. May 9, 1736. 

6. Phineas, b. Dec. i, 1739. 

7. Elizabeth, b. May 9, 1742; m. Timothy Clark. 

8. Symeon, b. June 18, 1744. 

9. Sybel, b. Aug. 28, 1747 [d. young]. 

10. Dorcas, b. Aug. 2, 1751 [m. Erastus Bradley]. 

Thomas Porter, s. of Capt. Thomas, m. 
]\Iehitable Hine, d. of Daniel of New 
Milford, Dec. 12, 1758. He d. Jan. 31, 
1S17* [she, June i, 1837, a. 98]. 

1. Sibil, b. Nov. 10, 1759. 

2. Rebecca, b. June 5, 1761; m. Jared Byington. 

3. Truman, b. Sept. 8, 1763. 

[4. Ethel, b. 1765; d- Mch. 2, 1797. 

5. Polly; m. Marshall Lewis. 

6. Stephen; m. Manvill.j 

[Thomas Porter, s. of Truman, m. Sally 
Warner, d. of Stephen, July 12, 1815. 

1. Emily M., b. Aug. 12, 1816; m. A. G. Hull. 

2. Esther, b. 1819; d. 1820, a. 3 m. 

3. Esther M., b. Apr. 22, 1822; d. 1841. 



FA3IILY RECORDS. 



AP107 



Porter. 



Post. 



4. Tames E., b. June 22, 1824. 

5. 'Martha H., b. Jan. 7, i8>8; d. 1831. 

6. George E., b. Sept. 14, 1830. 

7. Thomas E., ) 

and >b. Nov. 17, 1832.] 

8. Truman E., ) 



Timothy Porter [carpenter], .s. of 
Richard, m. Mary Baldwin, d. of Jona- 
than, Dec. iS, 1735. 

1. Sybel, b. Mch. 23, 1737. 

2. John, b. Feb. 22, 173S-Q. 

3. Lois, b. Feb. 6, 1742-3 fm. Bartholomew Bolt]. 

4. Mary, b. jNIay 28, 1745 [m. Eli Scott]. 

5. Mark, b. Mch. 27, 1748. 

6. Ruth, b. old stile, May 17, 1750; in. Gamaliel Fenn. 

7. Timothy, | 

and Vb. June 8, 1753. 

8. Lucy, I [m. Aug. Peck.] 

Timothy m. his second wife, Hannah 
Winters, Aug. 27, 1767. [He was Deac. 
Timothy in 1770.] 

■[Dr. Timothy Porter, s. of Daniel, m. 
Margaret Skinner, d. of Gideon of Bol- 
ton. She was b. 1739, and d. 1S13. 
He d. Jan. 24, 1792. 

1. Daniel, b. Sept. 23, 1768. 

2. Sylvia C, b. Feb. 24, 1771. 

3. Dr. Joseph, b. Sept. 3, 1772; m. Levinia Porter, 

d. of Preserved, and d. 'Slay 6, 1841. 

4. Olive, b. July 26, 1775; m. Moses Hall. 

5. Anna, b. Apr. 5, 1777; m. R. F. Welton. 

6. Chauncey, b. Apr. 24, 1779. 

7. Timothy Hopkins, b. Nov. 28, 1785.] 

Timothy Porter, s. of Daniel, m. Claris- 
sa Frisbie, d. of Ebenezer, May 17, 
1S12. 

1. Joseph, b. June 5, 1812. 

2. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 21, 1815; m. S. E. Palmer. 

3. Jane E., b. Feb. 3, 1818; m. J. C. Welton. 

Clarissa d. Nov. 18, 1821. and Timothy 
m. Dec. 30, 1S24, Polly Ann Todd, b. 
May 12, iSoo, d. of Hezekiah of 
Cheshire. 

4. Timothy Hopkins, b. Feb. 16, 1826. 
■5. Nathan T., b. Dec. 10, 1828. 

6. Thomas, b. Feb. g, 1831. 

7. David G., b. Mch. 8, 1833. 

8. Samuel, b. May 17, 1835. 

Truman Porter, s. of Thomas, m. Sarah 
Thompson, d. of Jonathan of New 
Haven, Jan. i, 1784. [He d. Sept. 27, 
1S3S; she, Oct. 26, 1S37, in Coventry, 
N. Y.]. 

1. Margaret, b. Nov. 23, 1784 [m. Parson Beecher]. 

2. Minerva, b. Oct. 24, 1788 [m. Truman Adams]. 

3. Julius, b. Aug. 26, 1790; d. 1831. 

4. Thomas, b. Jan. 7, 1793. 

5. Alma, b. Feb. 9, 1795 [m. Simeon Miles]. 

6. Sally, b. Sept. 25, 1801. 

7. Myretta, b. June 24, 1803; m. Edwin Birge. 

8. Hector, b. Aug. 11, 1805 [m. Isabella Upson]. 

9. William, b. Oct. 20, 1807; d. Mch. 30, 1809. 

Gabriel Post from Bellville, N. J., m. 
Elizabeth Allen, d. of Isaac, Apr. 11, 
1830. 

1. John H., b. Mch. 22, 1832. 

2. William R., b. Mch. 22, 1834. 

George \V. Tucker, an adopted child, b. Feb. 24, 
1841. 



Post. Potter. 

Welthy E. Post m. John Dudley, 1S39. 

Abigail Potter m. Sidney Hall, 1830. 

Ann Potter m. Hubbard Smith, 1835. 

Chastina Potter m. Hiel Bristol, 1825. 

Daniel Potter [b. in New Haven, June 9, 
1 716, s. of Daniel, m. ]Martha Ives of 
North Haven, Mch. 11, 1741]- She d. 
July 13, 1770, a. 34; he, Oct. 19, 1773. 

1. Elam, b. Feb. i, 1741-2. (Yale Col.) 

2. Ambros, b. Apr. 28, 1743 [d. Apr., 1822]. 

3. Eliakini, b. Jan. 6, 1744-5. 

4. Isaiah, b. July 23, 1746 (Yale, 1767). [He was 

grandfather of Longfellow's first wife.] 

5. Lyman, b. Mch. 14, 1747-8. (Yale Col.) 

6. Mary, b. Dec. 20, 1749; d. Aug. 31, 1750. 

7. Mary, b. Mch. g, 1751; m. Aaron Dunbar. 

8. Mabel, b. Nov. 5, 1752; m. Eliasaph Doolittle. 

9. Martha, b. Mch. 16, 1754; m. Jason Fenn. 
10 and II. Sons; d. young. 

12. Daniel, b. Feb. 15, 1758. (Yale, 1780.) 
[13. Lake, b. Aug. 13, 1759; m. Lois Royce.] 

Daniel Potter, s. of Daniel, m. IVIartha 
Humiston, d. of Caleb, Jan. 25, 1781. ^ 

1. Horace, b. Dec. 10, 1781.4 

2. Anselm, b. Nov. 20, 1786- 

D. Gano Potter [s. of Rev. Samuel] m. 

:\Iary E. Ward [d. of Richard], Feb. 

17, 1S41. 
Eliakim Potter m. Feb. iS, 1777, wid. 

Temperance Blakeslee, b. Oct. 21, 1756.' 

1. Esther, b. Apr. 2g, i77g. 

2. Phebe, b. June 22, 1781. 

3. Esther, b. Nov. 11, 1783. 

4. Eliakim, b. July 14, 17S5. 

Erastus P. Potter, b. Dec. 28, 1805, s. of 
Lemuel, m. Oct. 3, 1826, Elizabeth 
Roberts, b. Sept. 7, 1801, d. of Amasa. 

1. Elizabeth, b. May 17, 1827; m. A. P. Lewis. 

2. Franklin Drake, s. of Wm. M., an adopted child, 

b. Sept. I, 1840. 

Franklin Potter [s. of Rev. Samuel] m. 
Lucy Chase of New Preston, Mch. 2, 

1S50. 

Franklin S. Potter [s. of Ruel] m. Jane 

M. Gerard of Birmingham, May 30, 

1850. 
Jacob Potter, s. of Samuel, dec'd, m. 

Abigail Blakeslee, d. of Capt. Thomas, 

July 2, 1762. 

1. Demas, b. Jan. 29, 1763. 

2. Zenas, b. Mch. 5, 1765. 

3. Thomas, b. Mch. 14, 1767. 

4. Mabel, b. Apr. 3, 1769. 

5. Dolly, b. Mch. 21, 1772. 

6. Arza, b. Apr. 2, 1774. 
Chester, b. Oct. 23, 1787.8 

[Dr. John Potter m. Lydia Harrison — 

both of Farmingbury, Sept. 3, 17S3.] 
Joseph Potter [b. in East Haven, Oct. 
6, 1691, eldest s. of John, 3d, and Eliza- 
beth (Holt), m. Thankful Bradley]. 

6. Desire, b. Dec. 28, 1748. 

7. Enos, b. May 31, 1751. 

8. Desire, b. Oct. i, 1755. 



108 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



PoriER. Pratt. 

Milinna Potter m. Henry Patterson, 

i>S3i. 

Nancy Potter m. Samuel Chipman, 1S02. 

Oliver N. Potter [s. of Samuel] m. 
Louisa Potter [d. of Thomas] of Chen- 
ango Co., N. Y., Apr. 26, 1S46. 

Rachel Potter m. Lucian Judd, 1S20. 

Ruel Potter [s. of Lemuel] m. Clarissa 
A. Forbes, Jan. 7, 1S25. 

Samuel Potter [b. 170S, s. of John, 3d, 
m. 173S, Dorothj' Moulthrop, d. of Na- 
than, and] d. Nov. 22, 1756. 

Eunice, d. Nov. 13, 1756. 
Lucy, d. Nov. 7, 1756. 
Mary, d. Nov. 7, 1756. 
[Samuel. Jacob.] 

Samuel Potter, s. of Samviel (above), 
dec'd, m. Lydia How, d. of John, Jan. 

S, 1765. 

1. Unice, b. Sept. 6, 1765. 

2. Lucy, b. Nov. 11, 1766. 

3. Mary, b. June 15, 1768. 

4. Jared, b. July 21, 1770. 

5. Samuel, b. July 30, 1772. 

6. Betta, b. July 25, 1774. 

7. Enos, b. Sich. 2, 1777. 

8. Daniel, b. Feb. 13, 1779. 
Polly, b. Jan. 20, 1783. a 
Asher, b. Sept. 10, 1786; d. 17S9. 

[Rev. Samuel Potter, b. Sept. 23, 1779, s. 
of Lemiiel and Rachel (Perkins) of 
Bethany, m. May 9, 1799, Leva Judd, 
d. of Roswell. 

1. Samuel Darius, b. Dec. 15, 1799; d. June, 1803. 

2. Leva Maria, b. July 25, 1801; m. M. Baldwin. 

Leve d. Dec., 1S02, and Samuel m. 
Cloe Brocket, d. of Zenas, Mcli. 14, 
1803. 

3. A son, b. and d. May, 1804. 

4. Ro.\ana, b. June 23, 1805; m. M. D. Root. 

5. Samuel, b. Apr. 25, 1807. 

6. Zenas, b. Aug. 8, 1809. 

7. Thomas Perkins, b. Nov. 12, iSii. 

8. Miller, b. July 27, 1813. 

9. Isaac Fuller, b. July 25, 1815. 

10. Wilson, b. June 19, 1817. 

11. Doctor Gano, b. July ig, 1819. 

12. Chloe, b. Sept. 13, 1821; m. W. G. Chase. 

13. Thomas Perkins, b. June 2, 1824. 

14. Franklin, b. Nov. 19, 1826.] 

Zenas Potter m. Betty Blakeslee, Nov. 

15. I7S9.-* 

Zenas Potter [s. of Rev. Samuel] m. 
Mary Hotchkiss, Oct. 27, 1S32. 

John Powers m. Huldah Hall, d. of 
Zebulon Scott, Sept. 27, 1795. He d. 
Oct., 1822, and she, Aug. 28, 1S33, a. 
Si. 2 

Francis H. Pratt, b. May 11, 1S05, s. of 
Roswell, m. Sept. 10, 1832, Emeline 
Moss. b. Aug. 28, 181 1, d. of Amos of 
Litchfield. 

1. Henry Andrew, b. Aug. 27, 1833. 

2. Franklin Amos, b. Dec. 5, 1836. 

3. Mary Ellen, b. Oct. 17, 1841. 



Pratt. Prichard. 

Jonathan C. Pratt of Westbrook m. Re- 
becca Baldwin, July 2, 184S. 
Caleb Preston: 

Kliasapli, b. July 29, 1775. 

Jonathan Preston and Sarah [Williams 
m. in Wal., July 28, 1740]. 

1. Tabitha, b. Oct. 31, 1741; d. Jan. 30, 1741-2. 

2. ThankfuU, b. June 7, 1743. 

3. John, b. Oct. 26, 1745. 

4. Hannah, b. Aug. 25, 1747. 

5. Hackaliah, b. Nov. 29, 1749. 

6. Amasa, b. Apr. 22, 1752. 

7. Sarah, 1). May 2, 1755. 

8. Jonathan, b. Oct. 2, 1758. 

9. Martha, b. Aug. 22, 1760. 

Sarah d. Mch. 17, 1761, and Jonathan 
m. Catharine Luddenton, July iS, 1761. 

10. Moses, b. May 19, 1762. 

11. Abraham, b. Sept. 2, 1765. 

William Preston of Pittsburgh, Penn., 
m. Caroline I\l. Scovill, Oct. 31, 1S42. 

Harriet H. Price m. Samuel Tavlor, 
1S33. 

Abraham Prichard, s. of Roger, dec'd, 
m. Abigail Smith, d. of Thomas of Der- 
by, dec'd, Mch. 13, 1766. 

1. Reuben, b. Sept. 31, 1766 [went to Penn]. 

2. Abigail, b. Jan. 28, 1768 [m. in Harwintun, Sam- 

uel Cleveland]. 

3. Sibel, b. Oct. 21; d. Nov. 14, 1769. 

4. John Smith, b. Oct. 27, 1770; d. 1773. 

5. Sarah, b. Apr. 9, 1773 [d. June, 1851]. 

6. [John, b. Oct. 28, 1775]. 

7. Phebe, b. Mch. 20, 1778. 

[Abraham, b. INIay 25, 1785; m. Sylvia Clark.] 

Amos Prichard, s. of Roger, dec'd, was 
m. to Lydia Blakeslee, May 26, 1768, by 
Rev. Mark Leavenworth, v. in. 

1. Lydia, b. Apr. 12, 1769; m. Eleazer Hall. 

2. Amos, b. Oct. 22, 1770. 

Lydia d. Sept. 24, 1771, and Amos m. 
Mary Adams, wid. of Sam., Aug. 20, 

1777- 

3. Roger, b. May 17, 1778; d. Aug. 13, 1779. 

4. Sabra, b. Jan. 6, 1780 [m. Isaac Allen], 

5. Roger, b. Mch. 7, 1782. 

6. Orra, b. Oct. 26, 1783 [m. Dyer Hotchkiss, June 

12, 1809, and had Charles, Henry, Mary, Amos 
and Sarah] . 

7. Elias, b. Jan 28, 1786. 

8. Aaron, b. Dec. i, 1788; d. Mch. 31, 1795. 

9. Ruth, b. Oct. 17, 1791 [d. unm.]. 

Amos Prichard, Jr. and Lemira [Lounds- 
bury] : 

Esther, Betsey and Isaac, bap. Apr. 28, 1817.' 

Archibald Prichard, s. of David, m. Syb- 
l)cl Smith, d. of John of Canterbury, 
dec'd, Oct. 23, 1782. 

1. Julius Ca;sar, b. June 15, 1784; d. Oct. g, 17S8. 

2. Sotfey Smith, b. Aug. 28, 1786. 

Benjamin Prichard [s. of Benjamin of 
Roger, m. Mary Andrews, Jan. 20^ 
1712-13. 

John, Benjamin and Mary, bap. Oct. 18, 1719. 
Nathaniel, bap. Nov., 1820; m. Abigail Beach. 
Job, bap. 1722. Frances, bap. 1724. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP109 



Prichard. Priciiard. 

Benjamin m. Hannah Marks, July 4, 
1733, and d. June, 1760. 

Desire, b. July 7, 1734; d. unm. 
Esther, b. Nov., 1735; m. Johnson Anderson. 
Elnathan, b. June 12, 1737— all in Milford] . 
Jonathan, b. Oct. ig, 1739. 

[Benjamin Prichard, s. of Benjamin 
(above) m. Martha Lambert, d. of Jesse, 
Aug. 25, 1753. He d. Mch. 30, 17S2; 
she, 1S04. 

Martha, bap. July, 1754; d. 1812, unm. 
Benjamin, bap. July, 1756; m. Hannah Tuttle, 

d. of Jabez, and d. of small-pox in Wat., 1801. 
Tesse, b. 1759; m. Eunice Oviatt, d, of Samuel, 

and d. 1837. Mary. 
All lived in Miiford except Benjamin.] 

Bennett Pritchard m. Amy Wilmot, June 
6, 1S25; and Laura Russell, Mch. 21, 
1830. 

David Prichard [s. of James, m. Ruth 
Smith, d. of Joseph, Dec. 20, i757]- 

1. Archibel, b. June 25, 175S. 

2. Ruth, b. Oct. 16, 1760 [m. 1797, Justus P.Spen- 

cer of Benton, N. Y.; had two dan's, Almira 
and Ruth, and d. 1816]. 

3. INIanana, b. May 5, 1763 [m. Abbe]. 

4. Philoe, b. Aug. .5, 1765. 

5. Silva, b. Feb. 17, 1768 [m. Francis French]. 

6. MoUe, b. June 22, 1770; d. Jan. 24, 1772. 

7. Molle, b. Feb. 28, 1773 [m. Jacob Hall, 1795]. 

8. David, b. Oct. 24, 1775. 

9. Damon, b. Nov. 5, 1777. 

10. Sally, b. June 28, 1780 [m. Ira Hotchkiss]. 

David Prichard, Jr., s. of David, m. An- 
na Hitchcock, d. of Benjamin, Nov. 9, 
1797. 

1. Minerva, b. June 22, 1798 [m. Francis Bancroft 

of East Windsor]. 

2. William, b. Mch. 20, 1800 [m. Eliza Hall, d. of 

Amos of Cheshire, June 16, 1825]. 

3. Julius Smith, b. Feb. 14, 1802 [m. Maria, d. of 

J. Goodwin Tyrrell]. 

4. Elizur Edwin, b. Sept. 19, 1804. 

5. [Mary] Anna, b. Sept. g, 1806; d. Nov. 24, 1822. 

6. Sally Hotchkiss, b. Aug. 20, 1808; d. Feb. 4, 1827. 

7. [Dr.] David, b. Oct. 24, 1810 [m. Wealthy Hill 

Wilcox of Madison, Dec. 31, 1833]. 

8. Samuel Holland, b. May 27, 1813. 

9. Charlotte Lucy, b. June 27, 1816. 

David M. Prichard m. Rhoda S. North- 
rop of Watertown, Aug. 6, 1S4S. 

Dennis Prichard m. Julia Abigail Downs. 
Jan. 20, 1831. 

Elias Pritchard and Hannah [Payne, d. 
of David and Submit]. 

1. Lumon, b. Feb. 16, 1805. 

2. Aaron, b. Jan. 5; d. Mch. 27, 1807. 

3. Minerva, b. Oct. 2, 1808. 

4. Emeline, b. Dec. 29, 1810; m. Wm. Fulford and 

Bennett Scott. 

5. Rebecca, b. July 2, 1814; m. Norman Ailing. 

6. Clarissa, b. July 27, 1816; m. M. W. Welton. 

7. Roxana, b. Jan. 15, 1818. 

8. A twin with Roxana; d. 6 hours old. 
g. George Nelson, b. Aug. 17, 1819. 

10. David Miles, b. Mch. 2, 1825. 

11. William Harry, b. June 21, 1826. 

Elizur E. Prichard, s. of David [Jr.] m. 
Betsey J. Cooper [d. of Asa of Caleb] 
from Derby, ^Nlch. 11, 1S27. 



Prichard. Prichard. 

1. Elizabeth Ann, b. Feb. 24, 1828. 

2. Sarah [Johnson], b. Jan. 11, 1830. 

3. [A son. b. Feb. 22; d. Feb. 26, 1834.] 

4. Catharine Adelaid, b. Sept. 15, 1836. 

5. Florence Cooper, b. Apr. 3, 1843. 

Emily Prichard m. G. H. Roberts, 1S35. 

George Prichard, s. of James, m. Eliza- 
beth Hotchkiss, d. of Abraham of New 
Haven, Feb. 8, 1744-5. He d. Oct. 21, 
1820; she, Feb. 7, 1802. 

1. Cloe, b. Sept. 30, 1745; m. Seth Bronson. 

2. George, b. Apr. 4, 1747. 

3. Patience, b. Dec. 10, 1748; d. Sept. 9, 1749. 

4. Patience, b. May 8, 1751; d. Mch. 26, 1839. 

5. John, b. Apr. 3, 1753. 

6. Isaiah, b. Mch. 30, 1755. 

7. Diddymus, b. Apr. 27, 1757; d. Jan. 20, 1758. 

8. Hannah, b. Dec. 5, 1758 [m. Lew Smith]. 

9. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 7, 1762 [m. Joseph Peck]. 
10. Rebecca, b. Sept. 16, 1765 [m. Ephraim Nichols 

and d. Jan, 13, 1832]. 

George Prichard, Jr., s. of George, m. 
Hannah Williams, Dec. 24, 1767. 

1. Didimus, b. May 28, 1769. 

2. Jane, b. Sept. 23, 1771. 

3. Cloe, b. Oct. 23, 1773. 

4. Ezra, b. Oct. 10, 1775. 

George Prichard [s. of Isaac, Jr.] m. 

Frances Jennet Scott, Feb. 19, 1838. 
George N. Pritchard, s. of Elias. m. 

Laura A. Peck, d. of Titus of Bethany, 

Nov. 4, 1843. 

I. Elias George, b. Aug. 26. 1844. 

Gilbert Pritchard, s. of Roger, m. Julia 
A., wid. of Richard Sutton, Apr. 13, 
1845- 

I. INIary Ruth, b. Apr. 2, 1846. 

Isaac Prichard, s. of James, dec'd, ra. 
Lois Bronson, d. of Isaac, Oct. 4, 175S. 
[He d. Aug. II, 1798]; she. May 25, 
1824. 

1. Jared, b. May 15, 1760. 

2. Lidda, b. Apr. 24, 1763; m. Jason Frost. 
[3. James, b. Oct., 1765; m. Sarah Cook. 

4. Eunice, b. Jan. 28, 1767; m. Asahel Adams. 

5. ThankfuU, b. 1769; m. James M. Cook, s. of 

Charles of Moses. 

6. Isaac, b. July, 1772 (or 1773). 

7. Lois; m. Newton Hine.] 

Isaac Pritchard, s. of Isaac, m. Lucina 
Baldwin, d. of Maj. Noah, Feb., 1795. 

1. Julia, b. July 15, i797- 

2. Nancv, b. July 29, 1799; m. David Gibbs. 

3. Edward, b. Oct. 1,1801; d. Dec. 23, 1825. 

4. Leonard, b. Jan. 24, 1804. 

5. Isaac Lewis, b. 1807; d. Feb., 1826. 

6. George, b. 1809. 

7. Jared, b. Mch., 1811; d. Dec, 1840, 

8. Eliza, b. 1813; d. 1816. 

9. Mary, b. 1815; d. Apr., 1840. 

10. Charles, b. Sept. 3, 1S17. 

Isaiah Prichard, s. to George, m. Olive 
Upson, d. of Stephen, Dec. 13. 1780. 

James Prichard [bap. in Milford, 1698 
(s. of Benjamin, b. Jan. 31, 1657, m. 
Rebecca Jones, Nov. 14, 1683; s. of 
Roger of Wethersfield, 1640, of Spring- 
field, 1643, of Milford, Dec. iS, 1653, 



110 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Prichard. Pritchard. 

at which date he m. wid. EHzabeth 
Slough, d. of James Prudden. and d. 
m New Haven, Jan. 26, 1670-71); and 
Elizabeth John$on, b. Aug. 2S, 1701, d. 
of George and Hannah '(Dornian)' of 
Stratford, were m. Dec. 25, 1721. 

1. James, b. Jan. 31, 1722-3. 

2. George, b. Oct. 5, 1724. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 12, 1726-7; m. Benj. Nichols 

4. Isaac, b. Sept. 20, 1729— all b. in MilfordJ. 

5. John, b. July 25, 1734; d. Aug. 6, 1749. 

6. David, b. Apr. 7, 1737. 

7. Anna (Hannah), b. Apr. 4, 1740; ni. John Strick- 

land and Nathl. Sutliff. 

Mr. James Prichard d. Sept. 3, 1749, 
and Elizabeth m. Capt. Stephen Up- 
son. 

James Prichard, s. of James, m. Abigail 
Hickcox, d. of Ebenezer, Aug. 7, 1740. 

1. Jabez, b. Feb. 18, 1740-1 [m. Eunice Botsford, 

1764, and was Lieut. Jabez of Rev. War. See 
Derby His., pp. 638 and 647]. 

2. Jerehiah, b. Apr. 13, 1743. 

3. Elisha, b. Oct. i, 1745; d. Auij. 11, 1740. 

4. James the less, b. Apr., 1748; d. Aug. 16 1749 

5. James, b. June 4, 1750 [m. Rachel Warren of 

Derby, 1773]. 

6. Abigail, b. May 14, 1752. 

[7. Lydia, b. in Derby, Aug. n, 1757; ni. T Lum 
8. Sarah, b. in Derby, Nov. 15, 1759.] 

[James Prichard, s. of Isaac, m. Sarah 
Cook, d. of Charles (and Sibyl Mun- 
son) of Moses, Jan. 22, 1789, and d Apr 
16, 1813. 

Jeremiah, b. Feb. 17, 1791. 

Monson, d. young. 

Alma, b. Mch. 15, 1796; d. unm. 

Louisa, b. Sept. 2, 1798; d. unm. 

Isaac James (ace. to bap. rec), b. Nov. 11, 1802- 
_d. Aug. 4, 1827, unm. 

Sibyl Monson, b. Aug. 25, 1800; m. Ezra Ham- 
ilton of Hartford, Feb. 10, 1824. 
Maria Ann, b. June 24, 1805; m. Solomon Parker 
of Westville. 

Sarah Cook, b. May 22, iSii; m. Albert Downs.] 

John Pritchard, s. of Abraham, m. Anna 
Hotchkiss, d. of Eben of Prospect 
Mch. 25, 1806. 

1. Eben, b. Nov. 6, 1S06. 

2. Beza Smith, b. Apr. 22, 1808. 

3. Celestia, b. June 5, 1810; m. S. H. McKay. 

4. Buel, b. Jan. 26, 1812. 

5. Luther, b. Sept. 14, 1813. 

6. Abigail, b. Nov. 4, 1815. 

7. Mary Ann, b. Feb. 17, 1818; m. David Wheeler 

and Jesse Brown. 

8. Phebe, b. Mch. 4, 1822; m. Dan. Curtiss. 

Joseph Prichard, s. of Joseph of Milford, 
m. Rebecah Smith, d. of James, Aug.' 
2, 1761. He d. at Saybrook, Oct. 23, 
1775, a. 34. 

1. Sarah, b. Sept. 5, 1763. 

2. Mary, b. Aug. 19, 1765. 

3. Thomas Gains, b. Oct. 3, 1768. 

4. William, b. Jan. 4, 1771. 

5. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 14, 1774. 

Leonard Pritchard, s. of Isaac, m. Feb. 
1825, Elizal)eth Pritchard, b. Oct. 26^ 
1S05, d. of Asher. 

I. Eliza, b. Oct. 6, 1827; m. W. A. Walton. 
a. Sarah, b. June i, 1829. 



Pritchard. 



3. Mary, b. Jan 23, 1835. 

4. Frances, h. Dec. 20, 1838 
Julia, b. Dec. 2, 1844. 



Pritchard. 



Luzina Prichard m. Garry Atkins, 1S37. 
Mary Prichard, d. of Joseph of Milford, 

m. Benj. Richards, 1736, and "Amos 

Hikcox, 1740. 

Mary Prichard, wid. of Joseph of :\Iil- 

ford, m. James Welton, 1763. 
Philo Prichard, s. of David, m. [Sabra] 

Johnson, Dec. 17, 1783. 

I. Sukey, b. July 26, 1784. 

[Nathaniel, b. Aug. 25, 17S7.] 

Rebeckah Prichard m. Sam. Root, 1803. 

Roger Prichard [s. of Benjamin of Rog- 
er m. in :\Iilford, Mch. 8, 1715-16, Han- 
nah Northrop, d. of William. 

1. Roger, b. Dec. 25, 1716. 

2. Hannah, b. Oct. 2, 1718; d. 1738. 

3. Mary, bap. Mch. 4, 1722. 

4. Ann, b. Feb. 14, 1724. 

5. Ephraini, b. 1726; d. 

Hannah d. Nov. 28, 1726, and Roger 
m. Sarah .. He d. May 18, 1760. 

7. Phebe, b. Apr. 16, 1731; m. Warner. 

8. Abigail, b. Mch. 15, 1733-4. 

9. Sibella, b. Jan. 9, 1736; d. 17^7. 

10. Abraham b. Oct. 12, 1737— all b. in Milford]. 

Chil. of Roger and Sarah b. in Water- 
biiry : 

5 (11). Amos, b. Aug. 27, 1739. 

6 (12). Elihue, b. Oct. 27, 1741. 

[His heirs were Roger, Sarah, w. of Jo- 
seph Fenn, Jr., Ann, w. of Stephen 
Bradley, Phebe Warner, Amos and 
Abraham.] 

Roger Prichard, Jr., s. of Roger, m. 
Ann Buggbe of Derby, Feb. 16, 1742-3. 
[He d. Sept. 19, 1792.] 

1. Philene, b. May 18, 1744; m. Elijah Richards. 

2. Sybyl, b. Oct. 25, 1745; d. Sept. 23, 1749. 

3. Ehhue, b. Sept. ig, 1747; d. Sept. lo, 1740. 

4. Elihue, b. July 19, 1749; d. Aug., 1751. 

5. Ann, b. Apr. 24, 1752; m. Josiah Warner. 

6. Thomas, b. Nov. 29, 1754. 

7. Eliphalet, b. Dae. 2, 1756. 

8. Elihue, b. May 23, 1759. 

Roger Prichard, s. of Amos, d. July 25, 
1843, a. 61. « Chloe [Nichols], his wife, 
d. Aug. 17, 1839, a. 53.2 [Children: 

Gilbert. Dennis. Amy, m. Chas. Seely.] 

Samuel H. Pritchard, s. of David, [Jr.] 
m. Jennet C. Hall, d. of Lemuel of 
Cheshire, Oct. 31, 1837. 

1. Henry Hall, b. Apr. 1, 1838. 

2. Frederick Elizur, b. Nov. 13, 1844. 

Sarah Prichard m. Ethan Andrews, 

17S0. 

Sarah Pritchard m. Isaac Baldwin, 1S31. B 
Spencer Pritchard, b. Feb. 19, 1S07, s. 

of Isaiah, m. Nov. 13, 1829, Mary E. 

Wilmott. b. Sept. 4, 1S09, d. of Daniel 

of Prospect. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



APlll 



Pritchard. Raymond. 

1. Eliza Rebecca, b. Feb. 27, 1833. 

2. Cordelia, b. Dec. 10, 1S39. 

3. Frances, b. Jan. 27, 1843. 

Tamar Prichard m. Joseph Leaven- 
worth, 1797. 

Mary Prince m. Moses Noyes, 1778.^ 

Damaras Prindle ni. Bela Lewis, 1760, 
and Oliver Terrell, 1764. 

Eleazer Prindle, s. of Jonathan, m. An- 
na Scovill, d. of William, Oct. iS, 
1752. [She d. 1789.] 

1. Chauncey, b. July 13, 1753. 

2. Sary, b. Dec. 8, 1763; m. Levi Bronson. 

Elizabeth Prindle m. Sam. Root, 1740. 

Jonathan Prindle, s. of Eleazer of Mil- 
ford, dec'd, m. Rachel Hikcox, d. of 
Wm., dec'd, May 4, 1732. [He d. 17S2; 
she, 179S.] 

1. Eleazer, b. Mcli. 20, 1733. 

2. Jonathan, b. July 20, 1735; d. Feb. 17, 1736-7. 

3. Rachel, b. Mch. 29, 1738; m. Hez. Brown. 

4. Rebekah, b. Feb. 7, 1740; m. Noah Judd. 

5. Hannah, b. Dec. 23, 1742; m. David Arnold. 

6. Jonathan, b. June 21, 1748. 

7. David, b. July 6, 1751 [m. Hope Wetmore.] 

Jonathan Prindle, s. of Lieut. Jonathan, 
m. Margaret Hall, Oct. 13, 1768 [d. 
before 1782]. 

1. Ele, b. Jan. 3, 1770. 

2. IMichael, b. Dec. 16, 1771. 

Nathan Prindle, s. of Ebenezer of New- 
town, m. Mary Richason, d. of John, 
dec'd. May 9, 172S, and d. July 8, 1746. 

1. Nathan, b. Feb. 7; d. Feb. 27, 1729-30. 

2. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 5, 1731. 

3. Phebe, b. Oct. 24, 1733; m. Cor. Graves. 

4. John, b. Nov. 19, 1735; d. 1760. 

5. Mary, b. Oct. 23, 1737; m. Dan. Williams. 

6. Sarah, b. Feb. 21, 1740-1. 

7. Ruth, b. Mch, 18, 1742-3; m. Gid. Seymour. 

8. Nathan, b. Feb. 6, 1744-5. 

Nathan Prindle and Hannah: children 
b. in Wat. 

I. Mary, b. Aug. i, 1769. 

Phebe Prindle m. Moses Ford, 1755. 
Ruth Prindle m. Asa Bronson, 1785. 
Anna Punderson m. Chas. Merriman, 

1784.2 
David Punderson was mar. to Dinah 

Welton by Thos. ISIatthews, Esq., Feb. 

23- 1774- 

1. Clarissa, b. Jan. 30, 1776. 

2. Dinah Luce, b. June 29, 1778. 

3. Bille, b. Sept. 13, 1780.8 

Sarah Punderson m. Zach. Thompson, 

1771. 
Tenty Punderson m. Thos. Button, 3d, 

1782. 
Jeremiah Quinlan m. Margaret Regan, 

Sept. 4, 1S51. 
Susan M. Ray m. Richard Steele, 1S31. 
William Raymond and Mary:'* 

Merwin, b. Aug. 28, 1782. 



Redfern. Rice. 

James Redfern m. Eliza Langdon, Oct. 

23, 184S. 
Charles Reed from Westmeath, Ireland, 

m. Sarah Shehan from Queens Co., 

Ireland, Apr., 1842. 

1. James, b. Apr. 25, 1843. 

2. Susanna, b. July 11, 1844. 

3. Mary, b. Feb. 11, 1846. 

4. Robert, b. May 22, 1847. 

Emily S. Reed m. C. J. Nettleton, 1840. 
Francis Reed m. Ann Dillon, Sept. 27, 

1849. 
John Reed from Westmeath, Ire., m. 

Sally Reed in Ire., June 15, 1837. 

1. William, b. in Prospect, June 21, 1838. 

2. John, b. Jan. 30, 1840. 

3. DavLd, b. July 16, 1841. 

4. Joseph, b. Mch. 16, 1843. 

5. Thomas, b. Feb. 19, 1846. 

Patrick Renahan m. Ann Reilly, Apr. 

14, 1S50. 
Hannah Rew m. Sam. Lewis, 1743. 
John Rew, s. of Hezekiah, m. :\Iary An- 

druss, d. of John, Jan. 18, 1743-4- 

1. Naomi, b. Oct. 17, 1744. 

2. Jedediah, b. July 14, 1746. 

Nancy Rexford m. Abijah Fenn, 1793. 
Frances Reynolds m. David Hinman, 

1S50. 
Jane Reynolds m. Jacob Hagadom, 1830. 

Richard Thomas Reynolds m. Jemiah 
Foot, May 7, 177S. 

Samuel Renolds, b. Sept. 25, 1720, s. of 
Sam., dec'd, of Coventry [R. I.?], m. 
Sarah Warner, d. of John, Apr. 22, 
1742. He d. Aug. 13, iSio; she, June 
22, 1799. 

1. Abigail, b. Feb. 25, 1742-3. 

2. Sarah, b. Aug. 22, 1736 (1746). 

3. Lydia, b. Sept. 9, 1748; m. Eber Scott. 

4. Susanna, b. July 10, 1750. 

5. Samuel, b. Feb. 17, 1753. 

6. Loes, b. Mch. 11, 1755. 

Anna Rice m. Jesse Weed, 1777-^ 
Ann Rice m. David JTobin, 1838. 

Archibald E. Rice [s. of Isaac] from 
Woodbridge m. Susan Bronson, d. of 
Benjamin of Prospect, May 16, 1832. 

1. Edward James, b. May 25, 1835. 

2. Frederic, b. Jan. 23, 1837; d. Aug., 1839. 

3. Mary, b. May 15, 1840. _ 

4. Frederic Benjamin, b. Sept. 30, 1843, in Hud- 

son, O. 

5. [Caroline Cornelia], b. Dec. 28, 1846. 

Jacob Rice:^ 

Amos, b. Nov. 25, 1787 (?). 
Lucy, b. Sept. 20, 1786. 

Laura Rice m. G. W. Guilford and W. 

:\I. Drake. 
Leverett E. Rice of Woodbridge m. 



112 AP 



UISTOR T OF WA TEEB UR Y. 



Rice. Richards. 

Anna Maria Cook, d. of Samuel, Dec. 

6, 1S32. 

See also Royce. 
Rev. Samuel Rich and Angelina:^ 

Aliigail, bap. Oct. 17, 1819. 
F.meline, liap. Apr. 27, 1823. 

Abijah Richards, s. of Thomas, dec'd, m. 
Huldah Hopkins, d. of Capt. Timothy, 
dec'd, Dec. 15, 1749, and d. Oct. 4, 
1773- 

1. Streat, b. Dec. 12, 1750. 

2. Giles, b. Feb. 17, 1754 [m. Sarah Adams, d. of 

Rev. Thomas of Roxbury, Mass.]. 

3. Axhsah, b. Jan. 22, 1756 [m. Luther Hj-de]. 

4. Hannah, b. Maj- 9, 1758; d. June 30, 1760. 

5. Mark, b. July i;, 1760 [m. Ann Ruggles Dow]. 

6. Huldah, b. Sept. 16, 1762 [m. Abel ShermanJ. 

7. Hannah, b. May 5, 1765; d. Sept. 17, 1760. 

8. Sarah, b. May 8, 1767; m. Dr. Isaac Baldwin. 

Benjamin Richards, s. of John, dec'd, m. 
Mary Prichard, d. of Joseph of Milford, 
in Wat., July 29, 1736. He d. Nov. 22, 
1736, and Mary m. Amos Hikcox. 

I. Benjamin, b. May 23, 1737. 

Benjamin Richards, s. of Benjamin, m. 
Sarah Judd, d. of Capt. William, Mch. 
16, 1758. She d. Apr. 27, 1777. 

1. I.ewther, b. Jan. 2; d. Aug. 16, 1759. 

2. Mercy, b. Jan. 25, 1761. 

3. Lewther, b. Feb. 23, 1764. 

4. William, b. Nov. 13, 1766. 

5. Sarah, b. Oct. 12, 1772. 

6. Silence, b. June 9, 1775. 

Ebenezer Richards, s. of John, m. Eliza- 
beth Saymore, d. of Ebenezer of Ken- 
sington, Feb. 20, 1734-5. He d. Oct. 
20, 175S [she, Dec. iS, 1800, a. 87]. 

1. Elizabeth, b. May 25, 1734; m. John Judd. 

2. Samuel, b. Apr. 14, 1736; d. Aug. 28, 1758. 

3. Abigail, b. Sept. 21, 1738; d. Oct. 27, 1741. 

4. Gideon, b. Oct. 10, 1740; d. Oct. 22, 1741. 

5. Gideon, b. Nov. 21, 1742; d. Feb. 21, 1771. 

6. Noah, b. Sept. 14, 1745 [of Yates Co., N. V. 

1790]. 

7. Timothy, b. Dec. 27, 1747. 

8. Asa, b. Apr. 21, 1750; d. t'eb. 20, 1758. 

9. Obadiah, b. May 18, 1752. 

10. Abraham, b. Aug. 5, 1754 [m. Sarah Skilton, 
and d. in Rhode Island. She d. in Yates Co. 
in 1703, having been for several years asso- 
ciated with Jemima Wilkinson.] 

Elijah Richards, s. of Lieut. Obadiah, 
m. Philene Prichard, d. of Roger, Ajjr. 
28, 1774. 

1. Sarah, b. Apr. ii, 1775; d. Jan. 15, 1779. 

2. Ame, b. Sept. i, 1776; d. June 6, 1798. 

3. Obadiah, b. Nov. 11, 1778. 

4. Sarah Ann, b. Feb. 12, 1781. 

5. Elijah Davis, b. Apr. 5, 1784. 

6. Roger Hawkins, b. Apr. 14, 1786. 

Harriet Richards m. Rufus Pierpont, 
1S47. 

John Richards, soon of Obadiah, m. 
Mary Welton, d. of John. Sr., Aug. 17, 
1692. She d. July 21, 1733 [he, in 1735]. 

1. A soon, b. INIay abought 29, and dyed sometime 

in June, 1692. 

2. John, b. July 29, 1694; d. Nov. 29, 1719. 



Richards. 



Richards. 



3. Mary, b. Mch. 22, 1696-7 [bap. in Woodbury, 

June 27, 1697] and m. Samuel Scott. 

4. Thomas, b. Oct. 17, 1699 [in Newark, at the 

house of Deac. Thomas Richards, who was his 
grandfather's brother]. 

5. Hannah, b. June 26, 1702; m. Wm. Scovill. 

6. Obadiah, b. Apr. 20, 1705. 

7. Samuel, b. Jan. 31, 1708. 

8. Lois, b. Nov. 16, 1710; d. Dec. 23, 1718. 

9. Ebenezer, b. May 12, 1713. 
10. Benjamin, b. Oct. 15, 1717. 

Luther Richards, s. of Benjamin, m. 
Anna Saxton, Nov. 28, 1785.^ 

I. Orris, b. Feb. 7, 1787. 

Mary A. Richards m. H. V. Welton, 

1834- 
Mary J. Richards m. A. B. French, 1851. 

Obadiah Richards [s. of Thomas of Hart- 
ford, m. Hannah Barnes. 

1. John, b. 1667. 

2. Mary, b. Jan., 1669; m. George Scott. 

3. Hannah, b. Nov., 1671; m. John Scovill. 

4. Esther, b. June, 1673; m. Dr. Eph. Warner. 

5. Elizabeth, b. July, 1675; m. John Richason and 

Nathl. Arnold. 

6. Sarah, b. Apr., 1677; m. David Scott. 

7. Obadiah, b. Oct. i, 1679; d. at Lyme before 

1720. 

8. Rachel, bap. May 6, 1683; m. Jeremiah Peck. 

9. Thomas, b. Aug. 9, 1685. 

10. Benjamin, b. Apr. 5, 1691] d. June 2, 1714. 

Obadiah d. Nov. 11, 1702 [leaving 
widow Hannah, whose estate was pro- 
bated, June 4, 1725.] 

Obadiah Richards, s. of John, m. Han- 
nah Flikcox, d. of Benjamin of W^ood- 
bury, Mch. 22, 1732. 

1. Mary, b. July 26, 1733; m. Benjamin Scott. 

2. Hannah, b. Apr. 30, 1736. 

3. A dau., b. and d. June 15, 1739. 

Hannah d. June 27, 1739, and Obadiah 
m. Hannah [Davis], wid. of John 
Hawkins of Derby, Nov. 8, 1739. 

1. Lois, b. Aug. 7, 1740; m. Simeon Hopkins. 

2. Sarah, b. .Sept. 3, 1742; d. Sept. 19, 1749. 

3. Marcy, b. Mch. 29, 1744; d. Aug. 30, 1740. 

4. Obadiah, b. Mch. 27, 1746; d. Aug. 24, 1749. 

5. Elijah, b. Apr. 9, 1748. 

6. Sarah, b. May 9, 1750, d. July 12, 1751. 

Hannah d. Nov. 17, 1751. and Obadiah 
m. vSarah Ashlej^ of Hartford, July 23, 
1752. He d. July 19, 1775. 

Obadiah Richards, s. of Elijah, m. Chloe 
:\Ierrills, d. of Nathl., Aug. i, 179S. 

Samuel Richards, s. of John, m. Miriam 
Hawkins, d. of Jose h of Derby, dec'd, 
Apr. 18, 1734. He d. Apr. 18, 1735, 
and Miriam m. Thomas Hikcox. 

I. Miriam, b. Apr. 12, 1735; m. Elnathan Judd. 

Streat Richards, s. of Abijah, dec'd, m. 
Eunice Culver, d. of Stephen, Dec. 28, 
1775- 

1. Polly, b. June 29, 1778; d. Mch., 1780. 

2. Miles Hopkins, b. June i, 1780. 
Sally; m. Daniel Steele, Jr., 1S13. 

Thomas Richards's wife, Marah Porter 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP113 



Richards. Richason. 

of the East Jazise in new wark, d. July 
17, 1714. [Wife of Deac. Thomas, bro- 
ther of Obadiah?] 

Thomas Richards, s. of Obadiah, Sr. , m. 
Hannah Upson, d. of Stephen, Sr., 
Dec. 24, 1 7 14. [He d. 1726] and Han- 
nah m. John Bronson, 1727. 

1. Uniss, b. May 7, 1716; m. Isaac Bronson, 3d. 

2. Abijah, b. Jan. 24, 1717-18. 

3. Lois, b. Nov. I, 1719; m. Benjamin Bronson and 

Silas Hotchkiss. 

4. Joseph, b. Apr. 6, 1722. 

5. Benjamin, b. July 16, 1724. 

Thomas Richards, Jr., s. of John, m. 
[wid.] Su;-anna Rennolds, d. of John 
Turner of Hartford, Nov. 19, 1723. 
[Lieut. Thomas d. July, 1760.] 

1. John, b. July 26; d. July 28, 1724. 

2. John, b. June 23, 1726 [settled in GuilfordJ. 

3. Thomas b. Sept. 18, 1727. 

4. Susanna, b. July 3, 1729; m. John Nettleton. 

[She rec'd, by her father's will, his slave. 
Jack.] 

5. Ebenezer, b. INIch. i5, 1731 [d. iSoi]. 

6. Lois, b. Mch. 4; d. Aug. 25, 1734. 

7. Lois, b. May 31, 1735; m. Th. Hikcox, 3d. 

8. Benjamin, b. Aug. 3, 1737. 

9. Sarah, b. Aug. 28, 1739. 

Charles Richardson m. Emeline Hall of 

Wolcott, Aug. 19, 1S27. 
Ebenezer Richason of Thomas marid 

Margit Warner, d. of Thomas, Apr. 21, 

1715- 

1. Febe, b. Apr. 22; d. Jan. 9, 1716-17. 

2. Febe, b. Dec. 15, 1717; d. Mch. 23, 1733. 

3. Thomas, b. Dec. 7, 1720. 

4. Joseph, b. Sept. 24, 1725. 

5. Nathaniel, b. Apr. 8, 1729. 

6. Sarah, b. Dec. 23, 1731. 

Margai-et d. June 27, 1749, and Eben- 
ezer m. Hannah Bronson, wid. [of 
John], Oct. 18, 1749. She d: June 29; 
he, June 30, 1772. 
Israel Richason, s. of Thomas and Ma- 
ry, m. Hannah Woodruff, d. of John 
and Marv of Farmington, Dec. 5, 1697. 
He d. Dec. 18, 1712; she, Apr. 12, 1713. 

1. Mary, b. Apr. 6, 1699; d. Jan. 13, 1712-13. 

2. Hannah, b. Apr. 2, 1705 [m. John Scott of Sun- 

derland, Mass.]. 

3. Joseph, b. June 11, 1708. 

4. Issraell, b. Aug. 28, 1711 [lived with Deac. Clark 

in 1732; was of Sunderland, 1735. 
Ruth, bap. at Woodbury, July 4, 1703.] 

James H. Richardson of Middlebury m. 

Jane S. Atwood, Sept. 9, 1846. 
John Richason, s. of Thomas, m. Ruth 

Wheeler, d. of John of Woodbury, 

Apr. 22, 1701. 

I. Ruth, b. Feb. 10, 1701 [m. Moses Doolittle]. 

John m. his second wife, Elizabeth 
Richards, d. of Obadiah. Jan. 13, 1702-3. 

1. A soon, 1 d. Sept. 11, 1703. 

and yb. Sept. 4. 1703. 

2. A dau., \ d. Sept. 12, 1703. 



Richason. Rii;kv. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 5, 1704; m. Natl. Arnold, Jr. 

4. ]\Iary, b. Feb. 14, 1706-7; m. Natl. Prindle. 

5. Sarah, b. Apr. 28, 1710; m. Samuel Weed. 

6. John, b. May 5, 1713 [d. 1749, unm.]. 

Ye above written John's iirst wife Ruth 
dyed February 10, 1701. John Richa- 
son deyed Oct. 17, 1712. The above 
named Elizabeth Richards, wife of 
Nathl. Arnold, by her second marriage, 
dyed May 23, 1750. 
Nathaniel Richason, s. of Ebenezer, m. 
Phebe Brounson, d. of John, dec'd, 
Apr. I, 1752. 

1. Joseph, b. Mch. 28, 1754; d. June 16, 1773. 

2. Tamer, b. Sept. 13, 1758; m. Stephen Hotchkiss. 

3. Ruth, b. Dec. 15, 1761; m. Ashbil Osborn. 

4. Phebe, b. June 17,1765 [m. Joseph Bartholomew 

and d. Oct., 1800] . 

5. Ebenezer, b. Sept. 3, 1769. 

6. Hannah, b. May 22, 1772; d. July, 1773. 

7. Nathaniel, b. Oct. 28, 1774. 

8. Hannah, b. Oct. 18, 1779; m. Reuben Upson. 

Sarah Richardson m. A. N. Negus, 1847. 
Thomas Richason and Mary Senior: 
children that were born in Waterbury: 

6. *Rebecca, b. Apr. zy, ibyq; m. John Warner, 

and died Aug. i, 1748. 

7. Ruth, b. ]\Iay 10, 1681 [m. Henry Castle]. 

8. Johanna, b. Sept. i, 1683; m. Dan. Warner. 
g. Nathaniel, b. May 28, 1686; d. Nov. 3. 1712. 

10. Ebenezer, b. Feb. 4, 1689. 

Thomas d. Nov. 14, and Mary Nov. 21, 
1 7 12. [Their children, b. in Farming- 
ton, were: 

1. Mary, b. Dec. 25, 1667. 

2. Sarah, b. Mch. 25, 1669: m. in Farm., 1691, James 

Williams, servant to Nathaniel Sanford of 
Hartford. 

3. John, b. Apr. 15, 1672. 

4. Thomas. 5. Israel.] 

Thomas Richason, s. of Ebenezer, m. 
Abigail Way, d. of May, Apr. 8, 1756. 

1. Sarah, b. June 28, 1757; d. Jan. 13, 1772. 

2. Irene, b. Mch. 15, 1759; d. Feb. 25, 1776. 

3. Cloe, b. July 26, 1761; d. July 6, 1774. 

4. Israel, b. Sept. 25, 1764; d. Mch. 29, 1772. 

5. Abigail, b. May 24, 1769; d. Apr. 8, 1772. 

6. Anna, b. Mch. 13, 1771; d. Apr. 20, 1772. 

Abigail d. Jan. 21, 1775, and Thomas 
m. Eunice Hikcox, relict of John [3d, 
and d. of Dr. Benj. Warner], Apr. 15, 
1776. 

7. Thomas, b. June 12, 1777. 

8. Margaret, b. Aug. 14, 1779 [m. John Eeecher]. 

9. Eunice, b. Dec. 21, 1781 [m. Samuel Porter]. 

Thomas Richardson, Jr., s. of Thomas, 
m. Ruth Sutliff, d. of Nathl. of Wol- 
cott, Dec. 24, 1797. 

1. Ira, b. Oct. 12, 1798. 

2. Julius, b. Nov. 14, i8oo. 

3. Garry, b. Sept. 2, 1802. 

4. Goldsmith, b. Apr. 14, 1805. 

Jane E. Richmond m. W. H. Austin, 

1S22. 
Betsey M. Rigby m. Austin Painter, 

1830. 



* Probablv the first white child born in Wat. 



lUAp 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Rif'i5Y. Roberts. 

Josiah D. Rigby m. Hannah Moody of 
Burlington, May 23, 1S24. 

William Rigby d. 1S31.- 

Abner Riggs of Oxford m. Phebe Row- 
land, Aug. 22, i7So.« 

Hannah Riggs m. Calvin Spencer, Jr., 
1829. 

Joseph Riggs m. Mary Cady [d. of Arah] 

of Oxford, Jan. 30, 1831. 
William B. Riggs ni. Eliza Bassett, Feb. 

14, 1S30. 

Bernard Rigney m. Catharine Doolan, 

Meh. 5, 1S48. 

John Riley m. Alice^^Riley in Ireland. 

I. Michael, b. in Ire., Aug. i, 1845. 

John Reilly m. Rose Sheriden, Jan. 7, 
1850. 

Patrick Riley m. Catharine Del any,' in 
New Haven, July, 1840. 

1. Jane, b. June 2, 1841. 

2. Ann, b. Dec. 28, 1842; d. Dec. 14, 1844. 

3. Frances, b. July 16, 1845. 

Alonzo M. Robe of Canistota, N. Y., m. 
Harriet Limburner [d. of John], Jan. 

15, 1S51. 

Abial Roberts, Jr., and Martha: 

4. Martha, b. July 30, 1757; m. Enos Root. 
- 5. Hester, b. July 27, 1759; m. Uri Scott. 
^6. Mary, b. Dec. 31, 1761; m. Sele Scovill. 

7. Sarah, b. Apr. 12, 1764. 

8. Joseph, b. Nov. 21, 1766. 

9. Elizabeth, b. June 4, 1769. 
Moses; d. June 16, 1777. 

Martha d. June 14, 1769, and Abial (s. 
of Abial of Derby) m. Susanna Bissel, 
consort of Ephraim, Feb. 11, 1771. 

10. Ruth, b. Apr. 22, 1772. 

11. Phebe, b. Apr. o, 1779. 

[Abial Roberts m. Temperance Beebe, 
Apr. 15, 1773.] 

Abigail Roberts m. Willis Thomas, 1830. 

Amos Roberts: 

George Foot, Garry Hotchkiss, Sally Maria, 
Mary Ann, and Lucy Elizabeth, bap. Sept. 26, 
1822. 

Elias Robert: 

4. Phebe, b. Apr. 27, 1751. 

Elizabeth Robberts m. Eben. Saxton, 

I75«- 
Elizabeth Roberts m. E. C. Potter, 1826. 
Ephraim Robbards m. Phebe Clark, Dec. 

28, 1770. 

I. Daniel, b. Dec. 7, 1771. 

Ephraim Robards of Meriden m. Susan 

Ellis, Dec. 6, 1821. 
Falla Roberts m. Charles Bronson, 1836. 

George H. Roberts, b. Mch. 14, 1808, s. of 
Amos, m. Jan. 3, 1835, Emily Pritch- 
ard, b. July iS,''i7i3, d. of Isaiah. 



Roberts. Robinson. 

1. George Homer, b. Apr. 12, 1S36. 

2. Catharine, b. Nov. 15, 1841. 

3. Lucy Ann, b. Dec. 15, 1843. 

4. Harry, b. Mch. 2, 1847. 

[Gideon Roberts d. 1759, leaving wid. 

Mary; Gideon, and Lucy, m. Mun- 

son.] 

Hepsibah Robbard m. Seth Bartholomew, 

1755- 
Jane E. Roberts ni. H. M. Smith, 1S45. 
Joel Roberts [s. of Abial] m. Abigail 

Foot [of Newtown], July 10, 1766. She 

d. Jan. 15, 1S07. 

1. Abial, b. Feb. ig, 1768. 

2. Amasa, b. Aug. 4, 1769. 

3. Joel, b. Dec. 22, 1771. 

4. Sarah, b. Jan. 27, 1774; m. Isaac Allyn. 

5. Lois, b. Feb. 4, 1776. 

6. Abigail, b. Apr. 4, 1781 [m. Benj. Hine]. 

7. Amos, b. Sept. 17, 1782. 

8. Jerusha, b. Oct. 24, 1784. 

9. Hepsibah, b. June 26, 1786. 

10. Elizabeth, b. Aug. 13, 1788; d. June 6, 1807. 

Jonathan Robards and Marcy: 

Chil. b. in JNIiddletown and Waterbury : 

1. Esther, b. Sept. 18, 1752. 

2. Benjamin, b. Jan. 13, 1754. 

3. Ame, b. May 12, 1755. 

4. A son, b. in Wat., Nov. 4, 1756. 

5. Elihu, b. June 22, 1758. 

6. Deborah, b. Mch. 24, 1760. 

7. Seth, b. Mch. 27, 1763. 

Mary d. May iS, 1765; Jonathan m. 
Catern Doolittle, d. of Thomas, July 

11, 1765, [and d. 17SS.] 

>' Julia Roberts m. Jer. Peck, 1S22. 
Lucius Roberts m. Mary M. Peck from 

Bethany, Jan. 11, 1S46. 
Lucy Roberts: 

Zerali, 1). Aug. 23, 1778. 

Lucy Roberts m. Caleb Munson, 17S1. 
Lucy G. Roberts m. J. D. Durand, 1849. 
Maria Roberts m. Tim. Church, 1S36. 
Mary Roberts m. Samuel Sperry, 1761. 
Mary Robbards m. Benj. Terrill, 1763. 
Nathaniel Roberts of Middletown m. 

Huklah Payne, July 14, 1S24. 
Premela Roberts m. Sol. Alcox, 17S4. 
Sarah Roberts: 

Alvini, 1). June 29, 1706; bap. June 28, 1801. 

Ann Robinson m. J. T. Rollason, 1S29. 

Edward Robinson, b. June 6, 1S07, and 
Maria Baxter, b. July 13, 1S06— both 
from Birmingham — m. in Eng. , Mays, 

1S27. 

1. Maria Eliza, b. in Eng., May 2, 1828; d. 1835. 

2. Samuel, b. in Eng., June 6, 1830; d. 1833. 

3. Martha, b. and d. in London, July, 1832. 

4. Edward, b. in London, Sept. g, 1833. 

5. William Napoleon, b. in Middletown, Nov. 28, 

1835; d. 1837. 

6. Horace Ba.xter, b. in Middletown, Sept. 21, 1837. 

7. Ann Maria, b. Mch. 21, 1840. 

8. Rosetta. b. Apr. 16, 1843. 

9. George Lampson, b. Jan. 16, 1845. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP115 



Robinson. Root. 

Everett Robinson of Wrentham, Mass., 

m. Harriet Mallorv of Middlebury, Jan. 

10, 1828. 
Dr. William W. Rodman and Jerusha 

Pomeroy— both from Stonington— m. 

Nov. 26, 1S44. 

I. Charles Shepard, b. Aug. 24, 1845. 

Abijah H. Rogers of Branford m Har- 
riet Chidsev of East Haven, ■May 17, 
1S25. 

Hezekiah Rogers m. Martha vScott, Jan. 
29, 1763. 

1. Martha, b. May 9, 1764. 

2. John, b. Sept. 4, 1765. 

3. Abigail, b. Mch. 11, 1767. 

4. Freelove, b. Mch. s, 1769. 

Josiah Roggers: chil. b. in Wat. 

1. Sarah, b. Nov. 22, 1756; m. Josiah Atkins and 

Amos Culver. 

2. Mary, b. Oct. 24, 1758; m. Joel Hotchkiss. 

3. Adah, b. Sept. 5, 1762. . 

4. Josiah, b. Apr. 2, 1765. 

5. Enoch, b. Sept. 28, 1769. 

6. Joseph, b. Nov. 26, 1771. 

7. Jacob, b. July 3, 1774. 

8. Lydia, b. Nov. 19, 1777. 

Sarah d. Sept. 17, 1779, and Deac. Jo- 
siah m. wid. Mary Smith of New Ha- 
ven, Apr. 12, 1780. 

9. Samuel, b. Apr. ii, 1781. 
10. Ruth, b. Jan. i, 17S3. 

Martha Rogers m. Aaron How, 1773- 
John Rolinson m. Martha Heath, Sept. 

13, 1S29. 
James T. Rollason m. Ann Robinson, 

Oct. 28, 1829. 
Patrick Roody m. Mary Quigley, May 

25, iSsi.^ 
Caroline Root m. C. N. Newton, 1836. 
Chauncey Root m. Polly Button, Jan. i, 

1S23. 
Edward Root of Water town m. Fanny 

Peck of Woodbury, Aug. 27, 1843. 
Enos Root, s. of Samuel, m. Martha 

Robberts, d. of Abial, Feb. 4, 1778. 

1. Moses, b. Nov. ii, 1778. 

2. Samuel, b. Feb. 18, 1781. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 23, 1783. 

4. Levy, b. May 19, 1785. 

5. Chancy, b. Sept. 22, 1787. 

6. EHas, b. Aug. 14, 1789. 

7. Enos Pnndle, b. Nov. 30, 1792. 

8. Benjamin, b. Aug. 2, 1795. 

9. Martha Delia, b. May 20, 1797. 

George Root, b. in New York, Nov. 7, 
1797, m. Elizabeth S. Payne, d. of Har- 
mon, July 29, 1824. 

1. Reuben H., b. June 6, 1828. 

2. George W., b. Dec. 10, 1832. 

Elizabeth d. Sept. 3, 1833, and George 
m. Temperance Bronson, d. of Sam., 
Oct. 28, 1835. 



Root. Rose. 

3. Tane Augusta, b. Oct. 10, 1837. 

4. Edward Taylor, b. Feb. 12, 1840. 

5. Henry Bronson, b. Dec. 18, 1844. 

Joseph Root [s. of Samuel] m. Mary 
Russell, Jan. 19, i777- 

1. John, b. Dec. 28, 1777. 

2. Salmon, b. Mch. 12, 1779. 

3. Lyman, b. Mch. 22, 1781. 

4. Lucy, b. Apr. 30, 1784. 

5. Joseph, b. Mav 23, 1786. 

6. Harvey, b. July 28, 1788; d. Mch., 1795. 

7. Russel, b. Mch. 6, 1791; d. Mch., 1795. 

8. Polly, b. May 13, 1793. 

9. Sally, b. Apr. 22, 1796. 
10. William Russel, b. Sept. 20, 1798. 

Mary Root m. Isaac Bronson (i). 

Mary Root m. William Judd, 1712. 

Mary A. Root m. W. B. Gilbert, 1847. 

Matthew D. Root, b. Feb. 20, 1804, s. of 
Joseph of Canaan, and Roxanna Pot- 
ter, d. of [Rev.] Samuel, m. Feb. 15, 
1829. 

1. Eliza E., b. June 3, 1825. 

2. Jane C, b. June 15, 1830. 

3. loseph S., b. Nov. 6, 1831. 

4. Roxanna S., b. Aug. 22, 1833. 

5. .Marietta E., b. Sept. 22, 1835. 

6. Ransom S., b. Sept. 20, 1837. 

7. Matthew Edwin, b. Majf 29, 1847. 

Rebecca P. Root m. Wm. ^Hall, 1846. 

Samuel Root [b. Nov. 12, 1712], s. of Ca- 
leb, dec'd, of Farm., m. Elizabeth 

Prindle, d. of , dec'd, of Newtown, 

May 21, 1740. He d. May 17, 177^; and 
she, June 30, 1785. 

1. Still-born, b. July 25, 1742- 

2. Marcy, b. Sept. 10; d. Oct. 19, 1744. 

3. Samuel Brown, b. Aug. 22, 1750. 

4. Enos, h. Mch. 26, 1753. 

5. Joseph, b. May 22, 1755. 
6 Elizabeth, b. Jan. 21; d. Jan. 28, 1758. 
7. Salmon, b. July 9, 1759; ^- May 22, 1773. 
S. Elizabeth, b. June 22, 1761. 

Samuel Root m. Rhoda Root, June 16, 

177S. 

I. Wealthy, b. Mch. 13, 1779. 

Samuel Root, s. of Enos, m. Rebekah 
Prichard, d. of Benj., dec'd. Jan. i, 

1S03. 

1. Martha Tulia, b. Apr. i, 1804. 

2. Philomeiia, b. Dec. 18, 1805. 

3. Hannah Emeline, b. Aug. 11, 1808. 

4. Samuel Homer, b. Apr. 6, 1810. 

5. Ehza Rebekah, b. Apr. 14, 1812. 

6. Sally Maria b. June 4. 1814. ^ , ^ , 

7. Benjamin Edson, b. Sept. 20, 1816; d. Oct. 19, 
1817. 

S. Mary, b. May 14, 1819. 

William A. Root, s. of Joseph, dec'd, m. 

Clarissa G. Terril, d. of Amos, Nov. 

II, 1826. 
Augustus Rose m. Rachel E. Byington, 

Dec. 24, 1S36. 
Bela Rose of Wolcott m. Polly A. Todd, 

June I, 1S49. 
Samuel Rose from North Branford, b. 



116 AP 



JIJSTORY OF WATERS URT. 



Rose. Rovce. 

Dec. S, 1812, m. Delight Mix, d. of 
Philo, May 7, 1S37. 

1. Franklin Munson, b. Nov. 26, 1843. 

John Rouse and Allace: 

2. Elijah, b. Mch. 15, 1742-5. 

3. Allis, b. July 6, 1745. 

Mary Row (?) m. Samuel Camp, T769. 
Jane Rowley m. Nelson Barker, 1845. 
Polly Rowley m. Isaac Hine, 1836. 
William Rowley, s. of Jabez of Kent, m. 

Sarah Gordien, wid. of James, Feb. i, 

1753- 

1. Chaunsey, b. Apr. 5, 1756 [d. Jan., 1779].* 

2. Eli Smith, b. Apr. 25, 1764. 
;i. William, b. June 26," 1766. 

William Rowley Jr., s. of Wm., m. Ca- 
tharine Benham, d. of Shadrack, July 
S, 17S9, (or) July 9, 178S. 

2. ("first" erased) Lois Minerva, b. Nov. 27, 1700. 
5. William Henry, b. Dec. 31, 1798. 

Elizabeth Royse m. Joseph Judd, 1726. 

Lois Royce m. Luke Potter, 17S6. 

Martha Royse m. Edmund Scott, 1730. 

Phineas Royce: Sarah, his wife, d. Apr. 
30, 1742, a. 22. He m. Thankful Mer- 
riman, d. of Nathl. of Wallingford, 
Nov. 15, 1743. 

1. Sarah, b. Apr. 8, 1745. 

2. Keziah, b. July 5, 1747. 

3. Mehitable, b. May 29, 1749; ™- Tim. Tuttle. 

Thankfull d. Oct. 9, 1749, and Phineas 
m. Elizabeth Lord, wid. of Daniel of 
Lj'me, July 2, 1751. 

4. Phineas, b. Apr. 3, 1752. 

5. Nehemiah, b. Sept. i, 1753. 

6. Thankful, b. Feb. 11, 1755; m. Noah Tuttle. 

7. Samuel, b. Apr. 20, 1757. 

8. Elizabeth, b. Feb. 5, 1759. 

Elizabeth d. Feb. 15. 1759 [a. 41]. and 
Phineas m. Anna Hopkins, wid. of 
Thomas Bronson, Esq., Anr. 22, 1761. 
[He d. May 11, 1787, a. '71; and she, 
Jan. 2, 1804, a. So.] 

9. Sarah, b. Oct. 19, 1762. 

Phineas Royce, Jr., m. Lvdia Butler, 
June 25. 1772. 

I. David; b. July 18, 1773. 

Samuel Royce [s. of Ezekiel of Wal.]: 

3. Ebenezer; d. Apr. 24, 1764 [a. 4 yrs.]. 

4. Lucy, b. Feb. 17, 1763. 

5. Ebenezer, b. Feb. 10, 1765. 

Samuel Royce m. Abigail Hawley, June 

10. 1780.^ 

Polly, b. Nov. II, 1780. 
Phinehas, b. Jan. 9, 1783. 

Thankfull Royce m. Stephen Curtiss. 

Willard A. Royce of Bristol m. Mary M. 
Hurd, Apr. S, 1S49. 



Russell. Ryan. 

Aaron Russell from Boston m. Esther 

Spencer, d. of Deac. Calvin, Dec. 7, 

1S26. 

Celesta Russell m. Jesse Hitchcock, 1828. 

Charles A. Russell, b. Mch. 16, 1S03, s. 
of Enoch of Prospect, m. Lockey 
Beebe, d. of Amzi, Jan. i, 1825. 

1. Henry A., b. in Prospect, Aug. 14, 1826. 

2. Charles M., b. in Prospect, Feb. 16, 1828. 

3. Caroline, b. Feb. 11, 1830. 

4. Stearn, b. Feb. 25, 1832. 

Edward Russell, b. Feb. 20. 1799, s. of 
Stephen D., m. Fanny Chatfield, d. of 
Jos., Nov. 24, 1823. 

1. Emma, b. Feb. 25, i825; d. Oct. 16, 1828. 

2. Harry L., b. Mch. 6, 182S. 

Eliza A. Russell m. D. T. Monger, 1839. 

Emma E. Russell m. R. B. Sanford, 

1S47. 

George A. Russell of Hamilton, N. Y., 
m. Lydia A. Elderkin, Feb. 27, 1843. 

Harriet Russel m. Isaac Baxter, 1821. 

Israel W. Russell, s. of Stephen D., m. 
Nancv Piatt, d. of Enoch, Jan. 26, 
1S18. ' 

1. Israel LeGrand, b. Dec. 7, 1818. 

2. Woodward Jerome, b. Sept. 15, 1820. 

Laura Russell m. Bennet Prichard, 1830. 

Lauren L. Russell, s. of Enoch, m. Mary 
Fairclough, d. of Joseph [and wid. of 
Daniel Boyce], Mch. 17, 1842. 

1. Her first, by Daniel Boyce, named Daniel 

James, b. July 15, 1840. 

2. Laura Elizabeth, b. Jan. 7, 1844. 

3. Emily Rebecca, b. Nov. 2, 1845. 

Lewis Russell, s. of Enoch, m. Harriet 

Hitchcock, d. of Daniel, Nov. i, 1824. 
Lydia M. Russell m. J. W. Lines, 1825. 
Mary Russell m. Joseph Root, 1777. 
Nancy E. Russell m. Jared Carter, 1840. 
Ransom R. Russell ni. Loly Terrell, 

Nov. 27, 1820. 
Sarah Russell m. Stephen Judd, 1776. 
Selden Russell m. Laura Lewis, Dec. 6, 

1S21. 
William Russel of Glasgow, Scotland, 

m. Ursula Wood, d. of Rev. Luke, 

Aug. 22, 1821. 

William Nelson Russell, s. of Enoch, m. 
Minerva Hall, d. of Daniel, Apr. 10, 

1S36. 

I. Sarah Jane, b. Oct. 10, 1838. 

3. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 3, 1842. 

3. Emerilla, b. Aug. 9, 1844. 

4. Adeline, b. Nov. 6, 1846. 

Edward Ryan m. Maria O'Brien, May 5, 
1849. 



♦ Abraham Truck made his coffin; Nathaniel Selkrig and Moses Frost dug his grave. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP117 



Ryan. Sanford. 

John Ryan m. ^Nlary Smith — both of Ter- 
ry ville — Aug. I, 1849. 

Daniel Sackett of Milford m. Harriet A. 
Porter, d. of Widow Sally, Feb. 23, 
1S26. 

Milo Sackett, b. Apr. 14, 1S06, s. of Eli 
of North Haven, m. Rhoda Ann Hun- 
gerford, d. of David, June 10, 1832. 

1. Rhoda Ann, b. Sept. 12, 1833; d. Apr. 26, 1835. 

Rhoda d. Oct. 14, 1833, and Milo m. 
Lydia Hungerford, d. of David, Oct. 
23, 1834- 

2. Eunetia Ann, b. June i, 1S35. 

3. George David, b. Apr. 28, 1838; d. May, 1840. 

4. Ellen Eugene, b. Dec. 30, 1845; d. July 11, 1847. 

Allin Sage and Abigail: 

1. Allin, b. June 9, 1751. 

2. Selah, b. Dec. 18, 1752. 

3. Abigail, b. Aug. 4, 1754. 

4. Daniel, b. June 30, 1756. 

5. Caroline, b. June 15, 1758. 

6. Molly, b. Feb. 24, 1760. 

7. Matte, b. Apr. 28, 1762. 

John Salt of England m. Mary Ann 
Henness}' of New York, July 6, 1S45. 

Edward Sandland and Mary Francis — 
both from Birmingham — m. in England. 

1. William, b. in Eng., Jan. 24, 1824. 

2. Priscilla, b. .Sept. 21, 1826; m. L. A. Morris. 

3. Frances, b. July 17, 1829; m. Willard Tompkins. 

4. Edward, b. Apr. 3, 1831. 

5. James, b. Feb. 26, 1833. 

6. Joseph, b. Jan. 26, 1835. 

7. Emma, b. Oct. 26, 1837. 

Henry Sandland of Birm., Eng., m. Mary 
L. Atwood of Watertown, Apr. 3, 1828. 

John H. Sandland, s. of John, m. Abi- 
gail Merriam, d. of Edward S. of 
Watertown, Mch. 8, 1835. 

1. Julia Maria, b. Jan. 19, 1836; d. Aug. 14, 1S39. 

2. Elizabeth Hollis, b. June 15, 1839. 

3. F'rederick Augustus, b. Aug. 30, 1841. 

Sarah A. Sandland m, H. A. Hull, 1838. 
Thomas Sandland m. Jennet Saxton, 

Dec. 25, 1S32. 
William Sandland m. Sarah Hodson, 

Oct. iS, 1846. 
Abel Curtiss Sanford, b. May lo, 1809, s. 

of Truman, m. Hepsa Elizabeth Judd, 

d. of Thomas, Nov. 8, 1S29. 

Emily Jane, b. Dec. 12, 1831. 
Betsey Ann, b. Nov. 13, 1834. 
Eveline Eliza, b. Aug. 4, 1841. 

Amanda Sanford m. Apollos Benedict, 
1S20. 

Asenath Sanford nl. Calvin Hotchkiss, 
1S25. 

Cornelia Sanford m. G. W. Beach, 1847. 

Daniel Sanford, s. of Ezekiel, m. Thank- 
ful Toles, d. of Daniel of New Haven, 
Jan. 31, 1753- 

1. Ireniah, b. Nov. 7, 1753; m. Sam. Fenn, Jr. 

2. Thankful, b. Nov. 6, 1755; d. May, 1759. 



Sanford. ^ Sanford. 

3. Ezekiel, b. Nov. 23, 1757. 

4. Loes, b. June 15, 1760. 

5. Phebe, b. Sept. 20, 1762. 

6. Eli, b. Apr. 10, 1765; d. Mch. 22, 1767. 

7. Eli, b. Sept. 28, 1767. 

Dorcas Sanford m. Wm. Hammill, 1828. 
[Ezekiel Sanford m. Desire Warner, d. of 

Benjamin — allot New Haven — Feb. 11, 

1728-9, and d. 1760, leaving 

Daniel. Ezra. Hannah; m. Moses Ball and 
Joel Dutton. Desire; m. Usal Barker.] 

Ezekiel Sanford m. Sarah Cook, Nov. 11, 
1765. 

1. Sene, b. Sept. 23, 1766. \/ 

2. Deborah, b. July 3, 1768. ^ 

3. Damis, b. Mch. 4, 1770. 

4. Sabra, b. Oct. 24, 1772. 

5. Lines, b. Feb. 11, 1774. 

Ezekiel Sanford (above ?) m. Rebecca 
Foot, wid. of Ebenezer, Jan. i, 1781. 

Ezra Sanford, s. of Ezekiel, m. Martha 
Barker, d. of Usal, Oct. i, 1759. 

1. Desire, b. Dec. 26, 1760. 

2. Malical (?), b. Jan. 27, 1763. 

3. Joseph, b. June 27, 1766. 

Gideon Sanford d. Mch. lo, iSo6.^ 
Jared Sanford:' 

Amia, bap. May 26, 1805. 
Anna, bap. Mch. 19, iSog. 
Joseph Francis, bap. Aug. 18, 1811. 

Jesse Sanford m. Sarah Fenn, Sept., 
1780.-* 

Susanna, b. Nov. 19, 1781. 
Sarah, b. Aug. 27, 1784. 

Joel Sanford, s. of Ephraim of Litchfield, 
m. Mary Porter, d. of Thomas, Aug. 
24. 1757- 

1. Laurana, b. Sept. 2, 1758. 

2. Millecent, b. Nov. 23, 1760. 

3. Sue, b. Apr. 22, 1763. 

4. Eri, b. Feb. 17, 1765. 

5. Sylvia, b. Oct. 14, 1766. 

6. Ann, b. Nov. 5, 1769. 

Joel Sanford and Charry;! 

Ann Eliza, bap. May 7, 1837. ^ 

John Sanford d. July 21, 1802.' '■'^ 
John W. Sandford of Milford m. Mary 

Lounsbury, Oct. 2, 1S49. 
Libeus Sanford and Marilla [Hotchkiss]: 

Marilla; m. L. P. Smith, 1838. 
Laura Hotchkiss, bap. Oct. 24, 1819. 
Juliana, bap. July 20, 1823. 

Loly Sanford d. Aug. 25, 1S06. 

Mary Sanford m. Eben Hotchkiss, 1781. 

Miles Sanford and Mary: 

9, Asa, b. Nov. 26, 1765. 

Reuel F. Sanford, s. of Truman, m. 
Nancy H. Neal, d. of Timothy of South- 
ington, Apr. 11, 1841. 

1. Henry Francis, b. Dec. 16, 1843. 

2. William Mortimer, b. Apr. 15, 1846. 

Rufus B. Sanford m. Emma E. Russell, 
Mch. 28, 1S47. 



118 AP 



HISTORY OF WATEBBURY. 



Allen Umberfield, 1S12. 



h. Jan. 9, 17S4. 



Sankord. Scarrett. 

Sally Sanford m. Joel Finch, 1S2S. 
Sarah Sanford m. Oliver Stoutjhton, 

1787.=^ 
Sena Sanford i 
Sylvia Sanford 

I. Solonioa IJarkc 

Zachariah Sanford and Sarah: 
[He d. Jan. 11, 1774, a. 62]. 

I. Philemon, b. Feb. 3, 1739-40. 

^_^ 2. Stephen, b. Feb. 22, 1740-41. 

3. Enos, b. Mch. 3, 1743-4; d. Oct. 17, 1749. 

4. Sarah, b. Oct. 26, 1744; d. Oct. 15, 1749'. 

5. Zacheous, b. Nov. 24, 1746; d. Oct. 16, '1749. 

6. Enos, b. Sept. 7, 1749. 

7. Zacheus, b. Oct. 31, 1751. 

8. Ebas, b.-Jiily 7, 1753. 
(I. Sarah, b. June 8, 1755. 

Nathan Saunders m. Esther Dunk, Sept. 
10, 1777.3 

1. Martin Dunk, b. Aug. 29, 1778. 

2. Esther, b. Aug. 25, 1780. 

3. Amanda, b. June 30, 1783. 

4. Harvey, b. Apr. 4, 1786. 

Ulissa Savage m. Lyman C. Camp, 1S43. 
William H. Savage m. Adah A. Camp 

— both of Middletown— June 6, 1S38. 
Anna Saxton m. Luther Richards, 17S5.3 
Ebenezer Saxton and Eunice: 

6. Jerusha, b. Mch. 7, 1751. 

7. Sarah, b. May 13, 1754. 

8. Liddea, h. Mch. 7, 1756; m. O. Bartholomew. 

Eunice d. June 2, 175S, and Ebenezer 
was mar. to Elizabeth Robberts by 
Thomas Matthews, Justice of Peace', 
Sept. 5, 175S. 

1. Joseph, b. Sept. 25, 1759. ■ . 

2. John, b. Mch. 7, 1761. 

3. Hannah, b. IVIch. 8, 1764. 

4. Mamre, b. Mch. 14, 1766. 

,5. Mary, b. Dec. 23, 1767; d. Mch. 26, 1772. 
J 6. Dan, b. Nov. 4, 1769. 
7. Sibbel, b. Aug. 3, 1771. 

Henry Saxton of New York m. Roxa 
Adams, d. of William, June 14, 1S23. 
She d. Dec. 29, 1S29. 

Mary E., b. Apr. 18, 1824. 
Two chil., b. and d. in Ohio. 
Jane A., b. Mch. i, 1S28. 
Charles, b. Dec. 12, 1828 (1829?). 

Jehiel Saxton and Rhoda: 

1. Anna, b. Sept. 15, 1768. 

2. Lucy, b. Oct. 9, 1770. 

[Jehiel was post rider. He also had 
land interests in East Haddam, 177S.] 
Jennet Saxton m. Thomas Sandland, 
1S32. 

George C. Scarrett of Branford, m. Sa- 
' rah S. Mallory of Middlebury, Aug. 5, 
1850. 

janette L. Scarrett m. H. C. Hall, 1S50. 



Scott. Scott. 

Abel Scott, s. of Jonathan, m, Lois Clark, 

d. of Caleb, Jan. 8, 1750-51. 
Abel Scott, s. of John, dec'd, m. Ame 

Perkms of New Haven, Jan. 30, 1776. 

I. Ame, b. June 6, 1777. 

Abner Scott, s. of Isaac, m. Ahtheah 
Bradley, d. of John of New Haven, 
dec'd, Feb. 5, 17S3. Hed. Mch. 13, 1812. 

1. Lucy, b. Aug. 29, 1785. 

2. Clary, b. Feb. 14, 1788. 

3. Eldad, b. Apr. 25, 1791. 

4. Deborah, b. Nov. i, 1793. 

5. Alathea, b. Apr. 2, 1796. 

6. Wealthy, b. Oct. 7, 1798. 

7. Phebe, b. .Apr. 6, 1801; d. Oct. 4, 1805. 

8. Phebe Elmina, b. Aug. 15, 1805. 
Q. Marcus Bradley, b. June 18, 1807. 

Abner Scott of Watertown m. Nancy 
Adams, Sept. 23, 1S21. 

Amos Scott, s. of John, dec'd, m. Dor- 
cas Lewis ("Warner" erased,) d. of 
Ebenezer Warner, Apr. 4, 1759. 

1. Eunice, b. Feb. 23, 1760; m. John Fenn. 

2. Diane, b. Mch. 14, 1762; d. Mch. 12, 1763. 

Dorcas d. May 14, 1763; and Amos m. 
Lois Scott, relict of Ezekiel, Sept. 12, 

1763- 

3. Amos, b. May 3, 1764. 

4. John, b. Apr. 4, 1766. 

5. Edmund, b. June 7, 1768. 

6. Lois, b. Dec. 31, 1770. 

7. Dorcas, b. Nov. 5, 1773; d. July 11, 1774. 

8. Levi, b. July 3, 1775. 

Asa Scott m. Chloe Smith, d. of John, 
Nov. II, 1789. 

1. Harvey, b. Aug. 16, 1790. 

2. Betsey, b. July 16, 1792. 

3. Ruth, b. May 27, 1794. 

4. A son, still-born, Nov. 23, 1796. 

5. Elias, j 

and vb. Nov. 4, 1799. 

6. Lewis, ) 

7. Thomas Jefferson, b. Aug. 29, 1802. 

Asahel A. Scott m. Mary F. Baldwin of 

Orange, Oct. 6, 1S51. 
Ashley Scott, s. of Sam., m. Martha 

Judson, d. of Benj. of Stratford, Apr. 

2;, 1787. 

1. Betsey, b. Dec. 29, 1787 [m. James Street]. 

2. Catey, b. Jan. 15, 1793; m. Miles Morris. 

3. Lewis, b. Dec. 14, 1796; d. July 21, 1827. 

4. Edmund, b. Apr. 13, 1799. 

5. Emma, b. June 28, i8oi;.'d. Oct. 8, 1815. 

Barnabas Scott, s. of Obadiah, m. Re- 
becca Warner, d. of Doct. Ephraim, 
Nov. 15, 1764.* 

1. Sabra, b. Jan. 14, 1766. 

2. Orpha, b. Nov. 10, 1767 [m. Perley Gates and d. 

a. 97]. 

3. Margaret, b. Dec. 5, 1769; d. Sept. 22, 1773. 

4. Margaret, b. Nov. 5, 1772 [m. Elijah Botsford, 

and lived more than 95 years]. 

Bede Scott m. William Wilcox, 17S0. 
Benjamin Scott, s. of William, m. Mary 
Richards, d. of Obad., Jan. 13, 1757. 



Society 



• Rebecca Scott, widow with daughters, Orpha and Margaret, was in 1790, ' 
y in \ ates Co., N. \ . She was a woman of rare energy and virtue of character. 



a member of the Friends' 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP119 



Scott. Scott. 

1. Hannah, b. May 12, 175S. 

2. Mercy, b. Jan. 21, 1762. 

3. Cloe, b. Feb. iS, 1767; m. Elijah Merrill. 

Mary d. Sept. 15, 1770; and Benjamin 
m. Mary Whealer, Jan. 27, 1771. 

4. Mary, b. Apr. 25, 1773. 

Bennett Scott, s. of Joel, m. Sept. 3, 
1S29, Esther Maria Curtis, b. Jan. 19, 
1S12, d. of Orrin of Wolcot. 

1. William, b. June 21, 1830. 

2. Franklin, b. in Wolcott, Aug. 6, i?32. 

3. John, b. July 11, 1S34. 

4. Charles, b. Oct. 15, 1840. 

Bennett L. Scott m. Elizabeth J. Hurd, 
Nov. 17, 1S50. 

Bezaleel Scott, s. of Deac. Thadda, m. 
Sally, d. of wid. Clark, Apr. 11, 1S27. 

Charles Scott [s. of Daniel] m. Theodo- 
cia Holt, Oct. 7, 1S3S. 

[Dr.] Daniel Scott, s. of Jonathan, dec'd, 
m. Hannah Wav, d. of David of Litch- 
field, May 30, 1750 (?) and d. Apr. 27, 
1762. 

1. Esther, b. May 23, 1750. 

2. Jonathan, b. Sept. 29, 1751. 
■3.. John, b. Apr. 30, 1753. 

4. Martha, b. Jan. 19, 1755; d. Aug. 31, 1759. 

5. Eleazer, b. May 24, 1756. 

6. Elizabeth, b. Sept. 21, 1757; d. Sept. 15, 1759. 

7. Hannah, b. Jan. 16, 1759. 

8. Daniel, b. Oct. i, 1760. 

[Deborah. >Iartha, a. 5 wks. ace. to Probate]. 



David Scott, s. of Edmun, m. Sarah Rich- 
ards, d. of Obadiah, dec'd, June 10, 
1698. [He d. 1727; she, Aug. 27, 1747.] 

1. Hannah, b. Mch. 21, lOoS-a [bap. in Woodbury, 

Sept. 24, 1699]. 

2. Hester, b. Aug., 1700; m. John Warner. 

3. David, b. May 10, 1701. 

4. Ruth, b. Sept. 29, 1704; m. Jon. Kelsey. 

5. Martha, ) ^ 

and Vb. sometime in Jan., 1706-7; 

6. Mary, \ d. Apr.. 1707. 

7. Elizabeth, b. May 7, 1709; m. Samuel Judd. 

8. Stephen, b. Mch. 12, 1711. 

9. Obadiah, b. Dec. 4, 1734 (1714-) 
David Scott, s. of David, dec'd, ni. Han- 
nah Hikcox, d. of AYilliam, Jan. 25, 
1732-3- 

1. Zadock, b. Oct. 15, 1733 [d. Apr., 1746]. 

2. Nathan, b. Aug. 23, 1735 [d. Mch 4, 1748]. 

3. David, b. June 22, 1738 [d. Apr. 5, 1749]. 

4. Submit, b. Dec. 22, 1746 [m. Asa Leavenworth, 

s. of Thomas of Wood., June 6, 176S]. 

5. Sarah, b. Jan. 8, 1749; m. Wait Smith. 

David Scott, s. of Ebenezer, m. Martha 
Keeler, d. of Joseph of Woodbury, 
Apr. 14, 1800. He d. Dec. 5, 1827, a. 
62; she, Aug. 27, 182S. 

I. Rhoda, b. Dec. i, iSoo. 

--^Ebenezer Scott, s. of Samuel, Jr., m. 
•'' Mary Weed, d. of John, Jan. 26, 1757. 
She d. Dec, iSoi. 

1. Anne, b. Oct. 16, 1757. 

2. Samuel, b. Nov. 3, 1759. 

3. Ebenezer, b. Dec. 2; d. Dec. 16, 1761. 

4. Nehemiah, b. Dec. 12, 1762; d. Sept. 17, 1779. 



Scott. Scott. 

5. David, b. Dec. 2, 1765. 

6. Asel, b. Aug. 6, 1768. 

7. Ebenezer, b. Mch. 29, 1771. 

8. Polly, b. July 25, 1773. 

9. Isiah, b. Apr. 6, 1776. 

10. Sibel, b. Aug. 7, 1778. 

11. ^Nlehitable, b. Feb. 4, 1781. 

Eber Scot m. Lydia Reynolds, Apr. 27, 
1769. 

1. Aaron, b. Feb. 25, 1770; d. Sept. 21, 1776. 

2. Abigail, b. Aug. 25, 1775; d. Sept. 16, 1776. 

3. Abigail, b. ^lay 27, 1778. 

Sarah, wife of Eber, d. May 2, 1799. 
Edmun Scot, s. of Edmun, m. Sarah, 
wid. of Benjamin Porter, sometime in 
June, 1689. He d. July 20, 1746; she, 
Jan. 17, 1743-9- 

1. A son, b. Oct., 1690; d. Feb. 2, 1690-1. 

2. Sarah, b. Jan. 29, 1691-2; m. Sam. Warner. 

3. Samuel, b. Sept., 1694. 

4. Elizabeth, b. Mch. i, 1696-7 [bap. in Woodbury. 

Oct. 29, 1699], m. Samuel Warner. 

5. Hannah, b. June, 1700; m. Ebenezer Elwell and 

John How. 

6. Edmun, b. May 10, 1703. 

7. John, b. Sept. 21, 1707. 

3. Jonathan, b. Aug. 4, 1711. 

Edmund Scott, s. of Edmund (above) m. 
Martha Anddruss, d. of John, Aug. 12, 
1730. He d. Mch. 23, 1733; and she 
m. Eben. Warner, 1734. 

1. Jemima, b. May 23, 1731, d. May 26, 1735. 

2. Comfort, b. July 22, 1733; m. Obad. Scott. 

Edmund Scott, s. of George, m. Martha 
Royce, d. of Robert of Wallingford, 
Mch. 26, 1730. 

1. Mary, b. Mch. 23, 1731. 

2. Robert, b. Aug. 3, 1733. 

3. Noah, b. Jan. 24, 1736; d. May 9, 1737. 

4. Ebenezer, b. and d. Alch. 23, 1738. 

5. Martha, b. May 2, 1739. 

6. Abigail, b. July 3, 1742; m. William Hikcox. 

7. Comfort, b. Apr. 25, 1745. 
S. Noah, b. Apr. 4, 1748. 
9. Lydda, b. Mch. 23, 1751; m. Eben. Way. 

Edmund Scott, s. of John, m. Sarah 
vScott, d. of Samuel, Sept. 15, 1757. 
[He d. 1760, and] Sarah m. Thomas 
Hammond. 

Edward Scott, s. of Joel, m. Eunice Caro- 
line Frisbie, d. of Daniel, Sept. 23, 
1830. 

1. Merrit Edward, b. Nov. 26, 1831. 

2. Mary Caroline, b. Feb. 26, 1833. 

3. Orrin Elmore, b. May 27, 1843. 

Edward Scott of Naugatuck, m. Rosa- 
line Todd [d. of Russell], Feb. 19, 1851. 

Eldad Scott of Salem m. Eunice Scott, 
Dec. 9, 1812.* 

Eleazer Scott, s. of Jonathan, m. Martha 
Sutliff, d. of John, June 8, 1731. 

Eleazer Scott m. Anna Howes, June 22, 
1780.3 

1. Sally, b. Mch. 23, 1781. 

2. Isaac Howe, b. Jan. 31, 1783. 

3. Martha, b. Apr. 6, 1785. 



120 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



Scott. Scott. 

Eliphas Scott, s. of Obadiah, m. Han- 
nah Scott, d. of Gershom, Feb. 4, 1757. 

1. Nancy, b. Dec. 4, 1759. 

2. Jesse, b. Sept. 6, 1762. 

3. Irene, b. Nov. 16, 1767. 

4. Jared, b. Mch. 22, 1771; d. Feb. 13, 1773. 

Hannah d. May i8, 1774, and Eliphas 
m. Mary Porter, Feb. 22, 1776. 

5. Jared, b. Dec. 4, 1776. 

6. Lois, b. Oct. II, 1776 (1778). 
Mary, b. Mch. 17, 1781.8 
David, b. Nov. 5, 1782. 
Hannah, b. Aug. 27, 1784. 

Enoch Scott, s. of Obadiah, dec'd, m. 
Sarah Porter, d. of Lieut. Thomas, 
jMay 4, 1750. 

1. Hannah, b. May 19, 1751; m. Reuben Beebe. 

2. Eunice, b. Oct. 15, 1752; d. May 14, 1758. 

3. Enoch, b. Nov. 6, 1754. 

4. Sarah, b. Sept. 2, 1757 [m. Philologus Webster] . 

5. Uri, b. Aug. 22, 1759. 

6. Prevv, b. Apr. 6, 1761 [m. Linus Lounsbury] . 

7. Esther, b. Sept. 22, 1763. 

8. Mille, b. Mch. 21, 1766 [ra. Daniel Scovill]. 

9. Mark, b. Oct. 8, 1768. 

Enoch Scott m. AppeUna Calkins. Feb. 
16, 1776.' She d. 1830.* 

Eric Scott, s. of Joel, m. ]\Iay i, 1S31, 
Jennet Welton, b. Mch. 27, I'Sio, d. of 
Ezekiel of Watertown. 

1. Hannah Jennet, b. Dec. 4, 18:54. 

2. Marshall Eric, b. Apr. 29, 1S43— both in Water- 

town, r 

Ezebeson Scott (Zebulon ?j:* 

Justus, bap. at St. James, June 9, 1765. 

Ezekiel Scott, s. of Obadiah, dec'd, m. 
Lois Fenn, d. of John, Apr. 13, 1758. 
He d. Jan. 20, 1759, and Lois m. Amos 
Scott. 

I. Ezekiel, b. Jan. 3, 1759. 

Ezekiel Scott, s. of Amos, m. Olive 
Fenn, d. of John of Watertown, Nov. 
22, 17S1. 

1. Ezekiel, b. July 26, 1783. 

2. Dorcas, b. June 26, 1785. 

3. Lucy, b. Oct. 30, 1789. 

Frances J. Scott m. George Prichard, 
183S. 

George Scot, s. of Edmun of Farming- 
ton, m. Mary Richards, d. of Obadiah, 
sometime in August, 1691. He d. Sept. 
26, 1724; she, Apr. 24, 1754. 

1. Obadiah, b. Apr. 5, 1692. 

2. George, b.*Mch. 20, 1694; d. May 9, 1725. 

3. William, b. Mch. 3, 1696. 

4. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 4, 1698; m. Gamaliel Terrill. 

5. Zebulon, b. June 10, 1700; d. May, 1701. 

6. Samuel, b. Apr. 26, 1702. 

7. Edraun, b. Sept. 24, 1704. 

8. Benjamin, b. Apr. 30, 1707; d. Dec, 1725. 

9. Ephraim, b. June 16, 1710; d. Feb. 27, 1744-5. 

George Scott, s. of Obadiah, dec'd, m. 
Abigail Warner, d. of Samuel of 
Daniel, Oct. 24, 1751. 

1. Elijah, b. Aug. 18, 1752. 

2. Reuben, b. May 2, 1755. 

3. Enos, b. Dec. 9, 1757. 



Scott. Scott. 

4. Amzi, b. July 11, 1759. 

5. Ethiel, b. July 24, 1762. 

6. Ephraim, b. Nov. 20, 1766. 

Gershom Scott, s. of Jonathan, m. Marv 
Fcnton, d. of Jonathan of Fairfield, 
Nov. 17, 172S [and d. June 24, 1780]. 

1. Wait, b. Aug. 17, 1729. 

2. Hannah, b. Sept. 9, 1731; m. Elip. Scott. 

3. Sarah, b. Sept., 1735; ra. Sam. Fenn. 

4. Mary, b. May, 1739; m. Amos Hotchkiss. 

5. Gershom, j d. Jan. 29, 1778. 

and Vb. June 9, 1744. 

6. Ann, ) m. Alex. Douglass. 

Gideon Scott, s. of Samuel, m. Phebe, 
wid. of Abraham Barnes and d. of 
Caleb Clark, Apr. 15, 1755. 

1. Lois, b. Oct. 17, 1756; m. Ruswell Judd ? 

2. Caleb, b. July 11, 1758. 

Phebe d. Apr. 25, 1760, and Gideon m. 
Hannah, wid. of James Brown, Oct. 4, 
1762. She d. Sept. 12, 1766. 

3. Mary, b. June 25, 1763. 

4. Elathea, b. Mch. 18, 1765. 

Hannah Scott m. H. A. Parsons, 1828. 
Heman Scott and Susan:' 

David Adams, Mary Elizabeth, and Martha 
Abigail, bap. Apr. 21, 1S34. 

Isaac Scott, s. of Sam., m. Anna Fi'isbie, 
d. of Eben. of Sharon, Oct. 31, 1753. 

1. David, b. Jan. 25, 1755; dromnded '^la.y 10, 1773. 

2. Moses, b. Feb. 16, 1756; d. Dec. 21, 1773. 

3. Thadde, b. Apr. 25, 1757. 

4. Levy, b. Sept. 27, 175S; d. Jan. 15, 1775. 

5. Meribah, b. Aug. 10, 1760; d. Sept. 23, 1782. 

6. Abner, b. May 10, 1762. 

7. Wealthy, b. July 22, 1764. 

8. Abraham, b. Aug. 2, 1766. 

Anna d. Dec. 3, 1766, and Isaac m. 
Sarah Smith of Oxford, Mch. 4, 1767. 

9. Elizabeth Ann, b. Nov. 28, 1767; d. Sept., 1769. 

Sarah d. Feb. 12, 17S3, and Isaac m. 
Lois, Relict of Dan. Abbot, Feb. 15, 
17S5, and d. May 31, 1797. 

10. Easther, b. Dec. 26, 17S5. 

Isaac Scott, s. of Thaddeus, m. Luna 
Beach, d. of Simeon of Litchfield, Mav 
23, 1824. 

1. Mary Ann, b. Apr. 19, 1825. 

2. William Ira, b. June 14, 1828; d. Dec, 1829. 

Luna d. Mch. i, 1S33, and Isaac m. 
Hannah, d. of Squire Parrott of Fair- 
field, June, 1834. 

3. John, b. Sept. 27, 1837. 

4. Harriet, b. Dec. 19, 1839. 

Jesse Scott, s. of Simeon, m. Susan 
Downs, d. of David, Aug. 7, iSii. 

1. Ira, b. Mch. 15, 1812. 

2. Ursula, b. May 16, 1814. 

3. Spencer, b. July 9, 1817. 

Joel Scott, s. of Simeon, m. Hannah 
Bronson, d. of Lieut. Michael, Feb. 15, 
1796. 

1. Selina, b. Apr. 6, 1798. 

2. Lucy Anna, b. Au.g. 27, 1800; m. D. Hoyden. 

3. Harriet, b. Sept. i, 1802; m. Sherman Bronson. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP12] 



Scott. Scott. 

4. Eric, b. Sept. 2, 1804. 

5. Bennet, b. Aug. 23, 1S06. 

6. Edward, b. Sept. 22, 1S08. 

7. Hannah, b. Oct. 17, 1810. 

8. Eunice Amy, b. July 6, 1813; m. W. Grilly. 

9. Mary Eliz., b. Dec. 27, 1817; m. G. S. Stevens. 

Joel W. Scott m. Mary E. Clark, jNIay 

19, 1S51. 
John Scott, s. of Edmund, m. in Wat., 

Eunice Griffin, d. of Thomas [and 

EHzabeth] of Simsbury, Oct. 29, 1730, 

and d. Mch. 14, 1756. 

1. Amos, b. Feb. 19, 1731-2. 

2. John, b. Jan. 30, 1733-4; d. Mch. 5, 1766. 

3. Edmund, b. Jan. 9, 1735-6. 

4. Abraham, b. Mch. 18, 1739; killed with thun- 

der, Apr. 7, 1750. 

5. Eunice, b. Jan. 4, 1740-1; d. Aug. 12, 1759- 

6. Abigail, b. Oct. 25, 1743 [m. Moses]. 

7. Jonathan, b. Oct. 5, 1745; d. Apr. 29, 174Q. 

8. Ruben, b. Aug. 15, 1747. 

9. Abraham, b. May 11, 1750; d. Mch. 19, 1753. 
10. Abel, b. Nov. 19, 1755. 

Jonathan Scot, s. of Edmun of Farming- 
ton, m. Hanna Hawks, d. of John of 
Deerfield, sometime in November in 
the year 1694. He dyed May 15, 1745; 
and she, Apr. 7, 1744. 

The first child, b. and d. sometime in Aug., 1695. 

2. Jonathan, b. Sept. 29, 1696. 

3. John, b. June 5, 1699 [did not return from cap- 

tivity]. 

4. Martha, b. July 9, 1701; m. Jos. Hurlburt. 

5. Gershom, b. Sept. 6, 1703. 

6. Eleazer, b. Dec. 31, 1703. 

7. Daniel, b. Sept. 20, 1707. 

[Hannah and her two sons, Jonathan 
and John, were baptised in Woodbury, 
Nov. 12, 1699.] 
Jonathan Scott, s. of Jonathan (above), 
m. :Mary Hulburt of Woodbury, July 
14- 1725- 

1. John, b. May 6, 1726. 

Mary d. Jan., 1727, and Jonathan m. 
Rebecca Frost, d. of Samuel of Bran- 
ford, July 29, 1729. 

2. Abel, b. Aug. 3, 1730. 

3. ThankfuU, b. May 19, 1732. 

4. Phebe, b. May 24, 1734. 

5. Rebeckah, b. Oct. 3, 1736. 

6. Rachel, b. Nov. 3, 1739. 

7. Eben, b. July, 1747. 

Jonathan Scott, Jr., s. of Edmun (and 
Sarah), m. Abigail Sperry, d. of Moses 
of New Haven, Sept. 6, 1736, and d. 
July 2, 1 741. 

I. Abigail, b. Sept. 15, 1737; d. Apr. 29, 1741. 

*Jonathan Scott, s. of Jonathan, Jr., 

dec'd, m. Mary Doolittle, d. of Abel, 

Feb. 23, 1764. 
Levi Scott, s. of Thade, m. Sally Mark- 

um, d. of Jeremiah of Plymouth, Sept. 

5, 1804. She d. Nov. 11, 180S. 

Rhyley, b. July 3, 1806. 
Markum, b. Apr. 23, 1808. 



ScoTT. Scott. 

Linus W. Scott, s. of Simeon, m. Miner- 
va Nichols, d. of James, Feb. 8, 1S18. 

1. Esther Elizabeth, b. Feb. 13, 1819. 

2. James Sherman, b. Aug. 29, 1S20. 

3. Mara Maria, b. Mch. 2, 1822. 

Lydia Scott m. Isaac Castle, 1740. 
Marshall Scott d. Oct. 5, 1S42, a. 23. ^ 
Martha Scott m. Hez. Rogers, 1763. 

Nathan Scott, s. of Wait, m. Anna An- 
drews, d. of Ebenezer of the State of 
New York, Mch. 17, 1777. She d. Aug. 
21, 1795- 

1. Joel, b. Jan. 26, 1785. 

2. Sally, b. May 29, 1787. 

3. Ransiy, b. July 19, 1789. 

Obadiah Scott, s. of George, Sr. , m. Han- 
nah Buck, d. of Ezekiel, Sr., of 
Wethersfield, Oct. 10, 17 16. He d. 
1735; and she died suddenly, June 12, 
1749- 

1. Still-born, June 20, 1717. 

2. Zebulon, b. June 16, 171S. 

3. ]\Iary, b. May 20, 1720; d. Sept., 1722. 

4. Enoch, b. Oct., 1722. 

5. Comfort, b. Jan. 31, 1723-4; m. Jos. Upson. 

6. George, b. Nov. 10, 1725. 

7. Obadiah, b. Jan. 6, 1726-7. 

8. Ezekiel, b. Apr. 20, 1730. 

Obadiah Scott, s. of David, dec'd, m. 
Mary Andrus, d. of John, May 30, 
1733 [and d. Sept. 29, 17S4]. 

I. and 2. Still-born, Dec. lo, 1733. 

3. Eliphas, b. Jan. 31, 1734-5- 

4. Obadiah, b. Apr. 12, 1737. 

5. Jesse, b. May 30, 1739; d. June 30, 1744. 

6. Barnabas, b. Mch. 7, 1741. 

7. Mary, b. May 19, 1743; m. James Fancher. 

7. Abigail, b. July 3, 1746. 

8. Margaret, b. July 30, 1748. 

8. Mary, b. Sept. 14, 1750. 

9. Elizabeth, b. Feb. 15, 1753. 
10. Ruth, b. Nov. 7, 1756. 

(There is error in numbering these children, 
and probably in naming the second Mary.) 

Obadiah Scott, s. of Obadiah (of George), 
dec'd, m. Comfort Scott, d. of Edmund, 
dec'd, Apr. 8, 1751. She d. Apr. i, 
1798 [he, Sept., iSio]. 

1. Annis, b. Apr. 2, 1753. 

2. Marcy, b. July 2, 1755. 

3. Lydia, b. Nov. 28, 1757. 

4. Martha, b. Jan. 29, 1761. 

5. Sarah, b. Sept. 23, 1763; d. Oct. 30, 1765. 

6. Patience, b. June 21, 1766. 

7. Edmund Andrews, b. Oct. 17, 1771. 

Obadiah Scott, s. of Obadiah of David, 
dec'd, m. Hannah How, d. of John, 
Mch. 10, 1755. 

1. Hannah, b. Sept. 28, 1755. 

2. Olive, b. Sept. 23, 1757. 

3. Lewce (Lucy), b. July 26, 1760. 

4. Jesse, b. May 2, 1763. 

5. David, b. June 22, 1765. 

6. Rosamond, b. Nov. 6, 1768. 

Patience Scott m. Wm. Lewis, 1765. 



* Probably son of Jonathan and Rebecca, born after Rachel. 
13 * 



122AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Scott. Scott. 

Robbard Scott, s. of Edmund, m. Eliz- 
abeth Terrill, d. of Gamaliel, Dec. 29, 
1762. 

Robert Scott from Scotland m. Julia, 
wid. of David Hotchkiss, Apr. 23, 1S43. 

I. EIIlh Maria, b. Sept. 13, 1846. 

Samuel Scott, s. of Edmund, m. Mary 
Ricliard.s, d. of John, Jan. 13, 1724-5- 
He d. Apr. 30, 176S; and she, Sept. 5, 
1776. 

1. Gideon, b. Sept. 22, 1725. 

2. Lois, b. Mch. 20, 1727; m. Sain. Williams. 

3. Abraham, | d. Jan. 8, 1730-1. 

and Vb. Apr. 26, 1729. 

4. Isaac. ) 

5. Abraham, h. Oct. 18, 1731; d. Nov. 8, 1732. 

6. Mary, b. Sept. 7, 1733. 

7. Sarah, b. Apr. 4, 1735; m. Edmund Scott and 

Thomas Hammond. 

8. Samuel, b. Feb. 14, 1737-8. 

9. Jemima, b. Nov. 23, 1740; m. Jer. Peck. 
[Patience, mentioned in Samuel's will.] 

Samuel Scott [Jr., on land rec], s. of 
George, m. Priscilla Hull, d. of John of 
Derby, Sept. 26, 1727. 

1. Syble, b. July 6, 1730; d. Mch. 21, 1798. 

2. Elizabetli, b. Feb. 27, 1732; d. Sept., 1814. 

3. Ebenezer, b. Apr. 18, 1735. 

4. Eunice, b. June 11, 1738; d. Sept. 8, 1807. 

5. Samuel, b. Apr. 10, 1744; d. Sept. 20, 1749. 

Priscilla d. Sept. 23, 1755, and Samuel 
m. Lois, wid. of David Stricklin, May 
4, 1756. Lois d. Nov. 29, 1762, and 
Samuel m. Eunice Ashley, d. of Jona- 
than (Ebenezer?) of Hartford, Mch. 17, 
1763. She d. Jan. 12, 1774; he d. Sept. 
15, 1790. 

6. Ashley, b. June 17, 1764. 

Samuel Scott, s. of Samuel (of Edmund) 
m. Dameras Lewis, d. of Jos., dec'd. 
May 26, 1761. 

1. Thankful, b. May 4, 1763; d. Oct. 7. 1765. 

2. Ruth, b. Jan. 4, 1765; d. Nov. 6, 1787. 

3. Lewis, b. May 14, 1767; d. Jan. 18, 1782. 

Dameras d. Feb. 15, 1768, and Samuel 
m. Isabel Lewis, d. of Elisha, June 3, 
1769. 

4. Asa, b. July 3, 1770. 

5. Harvey," b. Mch. 18, 1772; d. Sept. 15, 1773. 

Sarah Scott m. Samuel Fenn, 1762. 
Sarah A. Scott m. Lyman Hotchkiss, 

1837. 
Sarah M. Scott m. Amos H. Hotchkiss 

[1S37]. 
Simeon Scott, s. of Zebulon, m. Lucy 

Hikcox, d. of Capt. Abr., Mch. 9, 1775 

1. Jemimah, b. Nov. 21, 1775; m. Llavid Hunger- 

ford. 

2. Joel, b. May 15, 1777. 

3. Prue, b. Oct. 4, 1778; d. Sept. 12, 1780. 

4. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 19, 1780. 

5. Daniel, b. Mch. 7, 1782. 

6. Mark, b. Sept. 30, 1783. 

7. Titus, b. Sept. 7, 1785. 

8. Jesse, b. June 10, 1787. 

9. Prudence, b. Mch. 5, 1789; m. Miles Newton. 

10. Linus Warner, b. Mch. 27, 1791. 



Scott. Scott. 

Stephen Scott, s. of David, dec'd, m. 
Rebeckah Woolsey, d. of John of Ja- 
maica on Long Island, Apr. 9, 1734 
[and d. 1744]. 

I. Sarah, b. Feb. 14, 1735-6 [d. Sept. 11, 1749]. 
-^ 2. Stephen, b. Sept. 14, 1738. 

3. Woolsey, b. Apr. 13, 1741 [d. 1794]. 

Stephen Scott, s. of Stephen, dec'd, m. 
Freelove Hikcox, d. of Amos, Nov. 30, 

175S. 

1. Freelove, b. May 9, 1759. 

2. Rebecca, b. Aug. 20, 1761. 

3. Stephen, b. Apr. 23, 1763. 

4. L'ri, b. May 13, 1765. 

Thadde Scott, s. of Isaac, m. Orange 
Hammond, d. of Thomas of Water- 
town, May 23, 1781. She d. Mch. 21, 
1S26 [he, Sept. 25, 1S32]. 

1. Levi, b. Oct. 27, 1782. 

2. IMoses Frisbie, b. Feb. 28; d. Mch. 21, 17S5. 

3. Jacob, b. Feb. 20, 1786. 

4. Anna, b. Feb. i, 1788; d. June 22, 1802. 

5. Philo, b. Oct. 6, 1790 [m. Harriet Tuttle, d. of 

Ephraim, and went to O.xford, N. Y., 1815]. 

6. Mabel, b. July 8, 1792; d. Oct. 24, 1803. 

7. Moses, b. Apr. 14, 1795. 

8. Thaddeus, b. Oct. 19; d. Oct. 29, 1797. 

9. Truman, b. Nov. 4, 1798; d. Oct. 19, 1803. 

10. Isaac, b. May 8, 1801. 

11. Bezaleel, b. May i, 1S03. 

Timothy Scott, s. of William, m. Sarah 
Sutliff, d. of Joseph, Nov. 9, 1757. 

1. Bede, b. Nov. 5, 1758. 

2. Leuce, b. Feb. 18, 1764. 

3. Sarah, b. Apr. 20, 1770. 

Titus Scott, s. of Simeon, m. Rhoda 
Hall, d. of Nathl., dec'd, Dec, iSoS. 

1. Junius De Los, b. Apr. 6, 1S09. 

2. Alvin Mylo, b. Apr. 10, 1811; d. June, 1S12. 
:;. William Edson, b. July 11, 1813. 

Uri Scott, s. of Enoch, m. Esther Rob- 
bards, d. of Abial, Dec. 26, 1780. 

1. Silas, b. July 22, 1781. 

2. Kusha, b. Aug. 7, 1783. 

5. Alpheus, b. Sept. 30, 17S5. 

William Scott, s. of George, m. Johanna 
Judd, d. of Thomas, dec'd, of Hartford, 
Nov. 30, 1727. She d. Jan. 25, 1771. 

1. Benjamin, b. Sept. 6, 1728. 

2. Timothy, b. Apr. 21, 1731. 

3. Anna, b. Jan. 11, 1733-4; d. Oct. 30, 1749. 

4. Rachel, b. Sept. 27, 1736; d. Apr. 2, 1766. 

5. Patience, b. Nov. 17, 1740. 

Wolsey Scott, s. of Stephen, dec'd, m. 
Margit Edwards, d. of Nathl., May 14, 

I7f)2. 

Their first, b. in Wat., Abigail Mills, b. June 2, 
1766. 

2. Asacl, b. Sept. 23, 1768; d. June 26, 1769. 

3. Sarah, b. May 4, 1770; d. Feb. 6, 1771. 

Zebulon Scott, s. of Obadiah, dec'd, m. 
Elizabeth Warner, d. of Samuel, Apr. 
18, 1748. [He d. May 21; she, June 21, 
1798.] 

1. Simeon, b. Mch. i, 1748-9. 

2. Huldah, b. Nov 7, 1753 [m. Hall? and] 

John Powers. 

3. Daniel, b. May 4, 1757; d. June 10, 1762. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP123 



SCOVILL. SCOVILL. 

Asa Scovill, s. of Lieut. John, m. Lois 
Warner, d. of Serg. Obadiah, Dec. lo, 

1755- 

1. Sela, b. Tune 20, 1757. 

2. Amasa, b. Dec. 22, 175S [m. Esther IMerrill, d. 

of Caleb]. 

3. Seidell, b. July 6, 1761. 

4. Sarah, b. Nov. i, 1766. 
[Obadiah, b. before 1770.] 

Daniel Scovill, s. of Timothy, m. Laura 
Munson, d. of EHsha, Dec. 25, 1S16. 
He d. Oct. 3, 1833, a. 58. (Did he mar- 
ry Miliscent Scott before 1799?) 

1. Melisse M., b. Oct. 22, 1817; m. Win. Sizer. 

2. Luzerne, b. Sept. 3, 1819. 

3. Lucius Daniel, b. Oct. 2, 1821. 

4. Geori,'e Nelson, b. Oct. 9, 1827. 

Daniel Scovill [s. of Rev. James]; his 
wife Hannah of St. Johns, N. B., d in 
Wat., Aug. 19, 1839, a. 53.- 

Darius Scovill [s. of Lieut. William] m. 
July 4, 1 77 1, Lydia Granniss, b. Dec. 
16, 1750." 

1. Selah, b. July 4, 1776. 

2. Asenath, b. Jan. 26, 1779. 
:;. Isaac, b. Mch. 4, 1781. 

4. Seabury, b. Jan. 26, 17S4. 

5. Stephen, b. June 26, 1786. 

Edward Scovill, s. of John, dec'd, m. 
Martha Baldwin, d of Jonathan, Jan. 
31, 1739. [He d. Sept. 5, 1779; she, 
Nov. 29, 1798.] 

1. Sarah, b. Feb. 25, 1740-1; ni. Isaac Merriam. 

2. Edward, b. Feb. 5, 1744-5. 

Edward Scovill, s. of Capt. Edward, m. 
Ruth Norton, Nov. 26, 1770 [and d. 
Mch. 21, 1778, leaving 

Martha, Ruth, and Sarah] . 

Edward Scovill, s. of James, Esq., m. 
Harriet Clark, d. of Eli, Aug. 21, 1S23. 

1. Stella ;\Iaria, b. June 11, 1824; m. L. S. Davies. 

2. James Clark, b. Sept. 4, 1S26. 

3. Thomas Lamson, b. Apr. 26, 1830. 

4. Julia Lyman, b. Jan. 16, 1S35. 

Elizabeth C. Scovill m. I. E. Ailing, 
184^. 

Emeriti A. Scovill m. L. S. Dougal (?), 
1 83 1. 

Emily A, Scovill m. George Forgue, 1S41. 

[Ezekiel Scovill, s. of Stephen of East 
Haddam, m. Mindwell Barber of Wind- 
sor, Oct. 23, 1740. He d. Aug. 5, 1791, 
a. 79; she, Sept. i, 1800, a. 85. 

Mindwell, b. Sept. 26, 1742. 

Keziah, b. Feb. 28, 1746. 

Sarah, b. July 6, 1754. 

Mary, b. May i, 1757; m. David Foot. 

Hannah, b. Oct. 7, 1761; m. Elijah Steele.] 

[Rev.] James Scovill, s. of Lieut. Will- 
iam, m. Ame Nichols, d. of Capt. 
George, Nov. 7, 1762. [He d. Dec. 19, 
180S, at Kingston, N. B., in the 50th 
year of his ministry; she d. June, 1835.] 



Scovill. 



vSCOVILL. 



1. James, b. Mch. 19, 1764. 

2. William, b. May 20, 1766 [m. Betsey Byles — no 

children; and Ann Davis — one child. 

3. Hannah; m. Daniel Micheau— three children. 

4. Rev. Elias; m. Eliza Scovill of Watertown — five 

children. 

5. Samuel; m. Dibby Gilbert and Mary Smith — no 

children. 

6. Daniel; m. Amelia Brannah and Hannah Wig- 

gins — no children. 

7. Sarah; m. Dr. Kushi Hatheway — no children.] 

8. Edward George. Nichols, bap. Jan. 20, 1782'- [m. 

Mary (Polly) Lucretia Bates — six children]. 

9. Henry Augustus, bap. Jan. 11, 1784- [m. Mary 

Cunningham — eight children. All these, ex- 
cept James, went to New Brunswick, and mar- 
ried there] . 

James Scovill, s. of Rev^ James, m. Ala- 
thea Lamson, d. of Mitchel of Wood- 
bury, Nov- 16, 17S8. He d. Nov. 26, 
1825; she, Jan i, 1846. 

1. James Mitchel Lamson, b. Sept. 4, 1789. 

2. Betsey, b. May 12, 1792 [m. Jolin Buckingham, 

Sept. ID, 1809] . 

3. Sarah Hannah, b. ^Ich. 25, 1794; m. A. Hitch- 

cock. 

4. William Henry, b. July 27, 1796. 

5. Edward, b. Dec. 31, 1798. 

6. Ame Maria, b. Feb. g, 1801; d. Apr. 3, 1804. 

7. Caroline, b. July 4, 1803; m. Wm. Preston. 

8. Alathea Maria, b. Aug. 14, 1805; m. Joel Hin- 

man. 

9. Mary, b. July 23, i8o3; m. Rev. J. L. Clark. 

10. Stella Ann, b. .May ig, 1811; d. Sept., 1S15. 

James M. L. Scovill m. vSarah Morton 
[wid. of Thomas, and d. of W. H. 
Merrimau], Oct. g, 1S49. 

Jane C. Scovill m. Davis Grilley. 1832. 

John Scovill, ye soon of John of Haddam, 
and sometime of Wat., was mar to 
hannah Richards, ye dau. of Obadiah, 
febra=6=i693. She d. Mch. 5, 1720 
[he, Jan. 26, 1726-7]. 

1. John, b. Jan. 12, i6g4. 

2. Obadiah, b. Apr. 23, i6g7; departed this life, 

Feb. 23, 1718-19. 

3. Sarah, b. Oct. 24, 1700 [m. Noah Hinman of 

Woodbury, and d. Apr. 23, 1741]. 

4. William, b. Sept. 7, 1703. 

5. Hannah, b. Mch. 19, 1706-7 [m. Eben. Hinman, 

s of Titus of Woodbury, before 1730.] 

6. Edward, b. Feb. 12, 1710-11. 

[Lieut.] John Scovill, s. of John, m. 
Tabitha Upson, d. of Stephen, Jan. 16, 
1723-4. He d. Apr. 28, 1759, a. 64 and 
[Tabitha m. Trowbridge.] 

1. Obadiah, b. Oct. g, 1725. 

2. Mary, b. i\Ich. 31, 1727; m. Andrew Bronson. 

3. John, b. Nov. 24, 1729; d. Dec. 6, 1736. 

4. Asa, b. Apr. 4, 1732. 

5. Hanna, b. Jan. 20, 1734-5; "i- Jabez Tuttle. 

6. John, b. Oct. 27, 1738. 

7. Stephen, b. Aug. 19, 1740. 

8. Timothy, b. June 27, 1742. 

9. Annisa, b. May 23, 1744; m. Nath. Selkrigg. 

John Scovill, s. of John, dec'd, m. Ann 
Barnes, d. of Samuel, Sept. 14, 1763. 

I Truman, b. Feb. 24, 1764 [d. 1830]. 

2. Reuben, b. Oct. 2, 1765. 

3. John, b. Feb. 17; d. Sept. 5, 1768. 

4. John, b. Aug. 12, 1770 [d. Oct. 10, 1830]. 

5. Anne, b. Dec. 27, 1772. 

6. Clarissa, b. Feb. 24, 1776. 



124 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



SCOVILL. SCOVILL. 

John m. Elizabeth Baldwin, June 4, 
177S [and d. Sept. 15, 1S07]. 

Marcus Scovill m. Ann Todd of Litch- 
field, Jan. 8, 182S. 

Molly Scovil m. Clement Nichols, 1S16. 

Nancy Scovill m. Ed. Chatfield, 1823. 

[Noah Scovill m. Abigail Gunn, d. ol" 
Enos, 1783. He d. Aug. 30, 1829, a. 56; 
she, Oct. 1839. 

1. Barzilla, b. Feb. 4, 1784. 

2. Aaron, b. Oct. 10, 1785; d. 1826. 

3. Enos, b. Apr. 2, 17S8; cl. 1799. 

4. Maria, b. July 8; d. July 26, 1790. 

5. Bill Harry, b. May 9, 1794. 

6. Elias, b. June 23, 1798; d. 1801. 

7. Hannah T., b. Nov. 12, 1801. 

8. Harriet, b. May 5, 1804.] 

Obadiah Scovill, s. of John, m. Hannah 
Hull, d. of Josiah of Norwalk, July 14- 
1752. 

1. Sarah, b. Nov. q, 1752; m. Sam. Hikcox, 3d. 

2. David, b. Jan. 26, 1755. 

Hannah d. Aug. 22, 1756, and Obadiah 
m. Hannah Porter, d. of Daniel, June 
II, 1760. She d. June 25, 1766, and he, 
Mch. ig, 1768. 

3. Anne, b. Feb. 4, 1761; d. Apr. 9, 1781. 

4. Daniel, b. June 5, 1762; d. Feb. 23, 1766. 

Obadiah Scovil, s. of Asa, m. Mille Nich- 
ols, d. of Benj., Mch. 30, 1790. 

I. Asa, b. Dec. 6, 1790. 
[2. Miranda, b. Dec. 14, 1792. 

3. Joseph, b. Sept. 3, 1794. 

4. Hannah, b. Oct. 15, 1796; m. Julius Morris. 

5. Benjamin Nichols, b. June 11, 1799. 

6. Emma, ) 

and vb. Mch. 5, 1802. 

7. Alma, ) 

8. Marcus, b. Jan. 16, 1804. 
Q. Milley, b. July 27, 1806. 

Mille d. Aug. 7, 1806, and Obadiah m. 
Mrs. Philomela Glazier. 

10. Malvina, b. Nov. 22, 1S07. 

11. Burritt, b. Apr. 3, 1810. 

12. Philomela, b. Oct. 11, 1811. 

13. Smith, b. Jan. 22, 1814. 

14. Samuel, b. July 5, 1817. 

15. Jiihn, 1). Sept. 25, 1S20.] 

Samuel Scovill, s. of William, m. Ruth 
Bronson, d. of Benjamin, late of Wat., 
Dec. 19, 1756. 

1. Annah, b. May 13, 1759. 

2. Ruth, b. Aug. 12, 1761. 

Ruth d. Aug. 18, 1 76 1, and Samuel m. 
Vodice Hartshorn, d. of Eliphalet, May 

3. 1764. 

3. Uri, b. July 28, 1765. 

Sarah Scovill m. Joel B. Foot, 1S26. 
Sarah E. Scovill m. Henry Banks, 1S51. 
Sale Scovill, s. of Asa, m. Mary Roberts, 
d. of Abial, dec'd, Apr. 29, 1784. 

1. David, b. Sept. 6, 1787. 

2. Mark, b. July 24, 1789. 

3. Ebenezer Robard, b. Nov. 25, 1791. 



Scovil. Scoviti.. 

Seldon Scovil, s. of Asa, m. Mehitable 

Blakeslee, d. of Reuben, Nov. 30, 17S4. 

1. Susanna, b. July 15, 17S5. 

2. Sarah, b. Nov. 9, i'^78S. 

3. Seldon, b. July 18, 1791. 

4. Louisa Anne, b. Dec. 9, 1792. 

5. Reuben B., 1). June ii, 1795. 

6. Leveret, b. Mch. 31, 1799. 

Stephen Scovill :'' 

Silva, liap. Oct. 12, 1773. 

Susanna Scovill m. Thomas Barnes, 

1721. 
Timothy Scovill, s. of Lieut. John, dec'd, 

m. Jemima Porter, d. of Dr. Dan , 

Apr. 7, 1762, and d. June 22, 1S24. 

[She d. Aug. 22, 181 2, a. 67.] 

1. Timothy, b. Nov. 28, 1762. 

2. Noah, b. Jan. 27, 1765. 

3. Daniel, b. Dec. 12, 1766; d. Apr. 8, 1767. 

4. Jemima, b. Jan. 3, 1768; d. j\Ich. 31, 1783. 

5. Hannah, b. Dec. 23, 1770; m. Obed Gibbs. 

6. Sylva, b. Aug. 28, 1773. 

7. Daniel, b. Nov. 6, 1775. 

8. David Killum, b. Jan. 4, 17S0 [d. May 25, 1811.] 

Uri Scovill, s. of Sam., m. Miliscent 
Southmayd, d. of vSam., Oct., 1784.^ 

1. Vodice, b. Aug. 15, 1785. 

2. Chester, b. and d. 1787. 

3. Southmayd, b. jVIay, 1789. 

William Scovill, s. of John, dec'd, m. 
Hannah Richards, d. of John, Apr. 17, 
1729. 

1. Anna, b. Mch. 25, 1731; m. Eleazer Prindle. 

2. James, b. Jan. 27, 1732-3. 

3. Samuel, b. Nov. 4, 1735. 

4. Abijah, b. Dec. 27, 1738. 

Hannah d. Apr. i, 1741, and William 
m. Elizabeth Brown, d. of James, June 
16, 1742. [She d. May 6, 1752, and 
William m. Desire Sanford, wid. of 
Caleb Cooper of New Haven (s. of 
John). He d. Mch. 5, 1755, and] Desire 
m. Deac. Jonathan Garnsey. 

5. William, b. Feb. 9, 1744-5. 

6. [Darius], b. May 15, 1746. 

William Scovill (s. of William above) m. 
Sarah Brown, Dec. 24, 1767 [and d. 
Aug. 13, 1S27]. 

I. Bethel, b. June 6, 1769; d. June 6, 1775. 

-2. Elizabeth, b. July 31, 1771; d. Jan. 14, 1774. 

3. William, b. Sept. 29, 1775. 

William Henry Scovill, s. of James, 
E,sq., m. Eunice Ruth Da vies [d. of 
Hon. Thomas J.] of Ogdensburgh, N. 
Y., July 2, 1S27. 

1. Alathea Ruth, b. Mch. 21, 1S28; m. F. J. Kings- 

bury. 

2. Mary Ann, b. May 30, 1831; ra. W. E. Curtis. 

3. Thomas John, b. June 9, 1833; d. May, 1839. 

4. Sarah Hannah, b. July 13, 1835; d. Nov., 1839. 

Eunice d. Nov. 25, 1839, a- 3-, 'i^d 
William m. Rebeccah H. Smith, d. of 
Nathan of New Haven, Mch. 23, 1841. 

5. William Henry, b. Jan. 7, 1842. 

6. James Mitchell Lamson, b. June 18, 1843; d. Feb. 

8, 1846. 

7. Nathan Smith, b. Apr. 3, 1847. 






FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP125 



ScoviLL. Seymer. 

William Scovill of Middletownm. Nancy 
Cook [dau. of Joseph], Nov. 20, 1828. 

Ann Sedgwick m. Timothy Judd, 1764. 

Ann Seely [d. of William] m. Asa Par- 
rel, 1S41. 

Charles Seeley, s. of William, m. Amy 
Prichard, d. of Roger, Dec. 25, 1843. 

1. Chloe Jane, b. Nov. 15, 1844. 

2. George Simeon, b. Feb. 2, 1S46. 

James M. Seeley m. Jane M. Phillips of 

Canton, June 7, 1S46. 
Mary A. Seeley m. W.W.Webster, 1S51. 
Sally Seley m. William Bunnel, 1S26. 
Almera Selkrigg (or Selkirk) m. S. U. 

Cowel, 1S14. 
John Selkrigg, s. of William, dec'd, m. 

Irene Hopkins, d. of Isaac, Nov. 29, 

1764. Irene m. Nathl. Sutliff, 1791. 

1. Silva, b. Sept. 30, 1765. 

2. Cloe, b. Mch. 5, 1767. 

3. Osee, ) 

and Vb. Oct. 17, 1768. 

4. Jesse, ) 

5. Irene, b. June 6, 1771. 

6. John, b. Jan. 30, 1775. 

7. Orpha, b. Feb. 21, 1777. 

8. Mark, b. June 5, 1780. 

Nathaniel Selkrigg [s. of William ?] and 
Mary: 

1. Jeremiah, b. 'May 25, 1756. 

2. Polly Gillet, b. Apr. 13, 1758. 

3. Lucy, b. Jan. 7, 1762. 

4. Hannah, b. Apr. 12, 1764. 

5. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 17, 1766. 

6. Jonathan Gillet, b. Dec. 17, 1768. 

Mary d. Apr. 30. 1769. and Nathaniel 
m. Anis Scovill, d. of Lieut. John, May 
25, 1770. [He d. in 1797; she, Mch. 4, 
1S04.] 

7. ]\Iary, b. Jan. i, 1771 ; m. Tames Nichols. 
S. Triphene, ) 

and >-b. Aug. 2, 1775; 

9. Lucene, \ d. Oct. 22, 1773. 

10. Lucene, b. Dec. 5, 1776 [m. Daniel Welton, and 

d. July 12, 1836]. 

11. Freelove, b. Feb. 20, 1779. 

Ruth A. Selkrig m. Asahel Clark, 1S12. 
William Silkrigg and Judith: 

1. John, b. in Middletown, June 14, 1734. 

2. Nathaniel, b. in .Mid., Apr. 3, 1736. 

3. AUyn, b. Sept. 11, d. Nov. 3, 1738. 

\. iMerrian, b. Jan. S, 1739-40; '"• Nat. Foot. 

5. Millecent, b. Dec. 6, 1742; m. Asa Judd. 

6. Else, b. Nov. 11, 1744; m. Moses Frost. 

7. William, b. Feb. 15, 1746-7; d. Jan. 9, 1749-50- 

8. Sarah, b. ]\Ich. 12, 1750-1; m. Isaac Foot. 

0. William, b. Apr. 24, 1753. 

Nathan Seward, s. of Amos, was mar. to 
Martha Gridley by Alexander Gillet, 
clerk, June 3, 1779. 

1. Asahel, b. Aug. 19, 17S1. 

Ruth Seward m. Reuben Frisbie, 1779. 
Abel Seymer, s. of Lieut. Stephen, m. 
Damaras Himiaston, Nov. 19, 1767. 



Seymer. S.a.ymore. 

1. Ziba, b. Oct. 3, 1768. 

2. Lucy, b. July 3, 1770. 

3. Martha, b. Mch. 11, 1772. 
~- 4. Titus, b. July 6, I774.-1 

5. Polly, b. July 3,1776. 

6. Abel, b. Aug. 13, 1777. 

7. Damaris, b. Sept. 4, 1779. 

8. Merril, b. June 29, 1781. 

9. Dorcas, b. Feb. i, 1783. 

10. Robert, b. Sept. 16, 17S5. 

11. Norman, b. ]May 8, 17S9. 

Alexander D. Seymour m. Susanna 

Southwell, Feb. S, 1S24. 
Amos Seymour m. Sarah Cook, Jan. 11, 

17S7. 

1. Anna, b. Aug. 27, 1787. 

2. Albert, b. Jan. 26, 1789. 

Boadina Seymour: 

Meranda, b. July 29, 17S7. 

Daniel Seymer, m. AlMgail Levingston, 
Mch. 2, 1772. 

1. John, b. Nov. 17, 1772. 

2. Mary, b. July 29, 1775. 

3. Sidney, b. May 29, 1777. 

Abigail, b. Sept. 8, 17808 (perhaps d. of David). 

Elizabeth Seymour m. Eben. Richards, 

1734- 
Gideon Seymore, s. of Stephen, m. Ruth 
Prindle, d. of Nathan, dec'd, Dec. 3, 
1761. 

1. Sarah, b. June 17, 1762; d. Nov. 2, 1775. 

2. Thankful, b. Feb. 25, 1764. 

3. Silva, b. Oct. 26, 1765. 

4. Almera, b. Dec. 4, 1767. 

5. Selah, b. July 5, 1769. 

6. Sala, b. April 4, 1771; Selah, 6th ch., d. Oct., 

1775- 

7. Ruth, b. Jan. 21, 1773. 

8. I,ydia, b. Dec. 12, 1774. 

9. Sarah, b. Sept. 5, 1776. 

10. Selah, b. May 21, 177S. 

Joseph Seymore, s. of Richard, m. i\Iar- 
grit Lothrop, d. of John of Nova Sco- 
tia, Apr. 2, 1764. She d. Dec. 26, 1771. 

1. Amos, b. Sept. 24, 1764. 

2. Richard, b. Feb. 22, 1767. 

3. Mary, b. Aug. 11, 176S. 

4. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 12, 1770; d. Feb. 17, 1772. 

Josiah Seymour m. Dinah Doolittle, 
Dec. 7, 1780.^ 

Heloise, b. Feb. 17, 1783. 
Silas, b. Dec. 8, 1785. 
Josiah, b. Apr. 23, 1787. 
Wealthy, b. Oct. 18, 1788. 

Lydia Saymore m. William Hikcox, 1745. 

Richard Saymore, s. of Ebenezer, dec'd 
(who was bap. in Farm., 1684), m. Mary 
Hikcox, d. of Capt. Samuel, May 20, 
1740. 

1. Joash, b. May i, 1742 [m. Phebe Bronson, d. of 

Amos, and was found drowned in a river, 
Nov. 18, 1795]. 

2. Mary, b. July 15, 1744; m. Levi Welton. 

Mary d. July 15, 1744, and Richard m. 
Johannah Brown, d. of Sam., dec'd, 
Apr. 27, 1747. [He d. Aug. 14, 1796; 
she, Nov. 5, 1S13.] 



126 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



vSaymore. 



Shepardson. Shepardson 



3. Samuel, b. June 5, 174S. 

4. Luce, b. Apr. 6, 1751. 

5. Joanna, b. .May 19, 1753 [d. Oct., 1756]. 

6. Huldah, b. Oct. 4, 1755 [d. Sept., 1756]. 

7. Joanna, b. Sept. i, 1757; m. Allyn Judd. 

8. Josiah, b. Oct. 11, 1759. 

9. Huldah, b. Dec. 23, 1761. 

10. Ann, b. Feb., last day, 1764. 

11. Vodice, b. Mch., 1766. 

12. Miles, b. July, 1769. 

Robert S. Seymour, b. Sept. 23, 1S02, s. 
of Richard of Water town, m. Nov. 30, 
1828, Abigail Bronson, b. Sept. 14, 1S03, 
d. of Philenor. 

I. Henry Augustus, b. Sept. 29, 1829. 

3. Charles E., b. June i, 1834. 

4. Sarah Jane, b. May 14, 1836. 

5. Harriet Elvira, b. Sept. 29, 1842. 

6. Franklin, b. Sept. 26, 1844. 

7. Ellen Louise, b. Apr. 15, 1847. 

Samuel Seymour m. Meliitable Dayton, 
May iS, 17S0.3 

Samuel, b. Mch. 25, 17S1; d. June 22, 1785. 
Isaac, b. July 7, 1784. 
Sally, b. May 24, 17S6. 
Samuel, b. Alay 24, 17SS. 

Stephen Saymore, s. of Ebenezer, dec'd, 
m. Mehitable, d. of Capt. vSam. Plikcox, 
Mch. 1 8, 1 740- 1. 

1. Gideon, b. Sept. 24, 1741. 

2. Thankful, b. Nov. 6, 1743; m. Thomas Hickco.x, 

Jr. 

3. Abel, b. July 2, 1745. 

4. Daniel, b. Oct. 30, 1748. 

5. David, b. May 5, 1750. 

6. Amos, b. July 9, 1752; d. Dec. 11, 1759. 

7. Lydia, b. June 17, 1754; d. Oct. 2, 1772. 

8. Zadock, b. Apr. 30, 1757. 

9. Mehitable, j 

and Vb. July 21, 1759. 

10. Stephen, ) 

11. Anie, b. June 7, 1761. 

12. Amos, b. Sept. 5, 1766. 

Mehitable d. May 9, 1767, and Stephen 
ni. Oct. 12, 1767, Mary, wid. of Eben. 
Ehvell. 

Enoch E. Shaw ni. Ann Donnelly, A23r. 
15, 1S51. 

Dennis Shea of Hartford m. Catharine 
Galvin, May 14, 1S49. 

Robert Sheehan m. Alice Black, July 4, 

1851.* 
David Shelton and Elizabeth: 

1. Abi'^ail, 1). July 20, 1772. 

2. Samuel blasters, b. Oct. 28, 1774. 

3. Ransom, b. Aug. 31, 1776. 

4. Cloe, b. July 9, 1778. 

Abigail Shepard m. Daniel Ilayden, 

iSoi. 
Ruth Sheppard m. Elihu Spencer. 1793. 
Samuel Shepherd:^ 

Anna, ba]). Jan. 18, iSoi. 

John Shepardson m. Emily Albro— l^oth 
of Attleborough, Mass. — Oct. 12, 1848. 



Smith. 

Otis Shepardson of New Haven m. Lucy 
S. Pierpnnt, Oct. 20, 1846. 

Parrel! Sheridan m. Winifred Wiscon, 
Jan. 7, 1S4S." 

Eliza Sherman m. L. F. Hikcox, 1837. 
Elizabeth Sherman m. Alsop Baldwin, 

1773- 
Elizabeth L, Sherman m. L. E. Hikcox, 

1835. 

Harriet M. Sherman m. Sam. Nettleton, 
1842. 

Maria Sherman m. Rev. Ira Hart, 1798. 

Stephen Sherwood of Salem m. Mary 
Hitchcock of Bethany, July 13, 1S34. 

Joseph Shipley m. Sarah, wid. of Will- 
iam Stanley, Mch. 11, 1S39. 

1. Alfred, b. Jan. i, 1840. 

2. Ralph, b. May 4, 1845. 

Sarah Shipley m. W. H. Jones, 1846. 

John Simpson m. Sarah M. Blackman— 

both of Plymouth — Jan. 5, 1S51. 

John Singleton of Philadelphia m. Electa 
Frerv of Southampton, Mass., Nov. 25, 
1S50.' 

Timothy Sizer, s. of Abel of Middletown, 
m. the widow Rebecca Savage, Sept. 
10, 1795. 

Their first two chil. d. soon after birth. 

3. Olive, b. Dec. 27, 1798. 

4. Rebecca, b. Jan. 12, 1801. 

William Sizer m. Melissa Scovill, Jan. 
13, 1768. 

Dorcas Skinner m. Samuel Southmayd, 
176S. 

John Skinner m. Emeline Frisbie, d. of 
Ebenezer. She d. in Ohio, Oct. 27, 

1S33. 

I. Emily, b. June 7, 1831. 

Maltha A. Skinner m. Rev. H. B. Elliot, 
1S43. 

fjohn Slater m. ^lartha Barnes, d. of 
Samuel, Apr. 19, 1750. 

fJohn Slaterree (Slaughti^ee on First 
Church records) m. Mary Barnes, d. of 
Samuel, Nov. 11, 1755 [and d. 17S9J. 

1. Synthia, b. June 18, 1759 [d. Oct. 17, 1830]. 

2. Alartha, b. Nov. 4, 1761 [m. Levi BronsonJ . 

3. Mary, b. Jan. 27, 1765 [d. Mch. 30, iSii]. 

Mary Slaughter m. Joseiih Lewis, 1727. 

Concurrance Smedley m. Samuel Guern- 

sc}-, 1766. 
Abigail Smith m. Abr. Prichard, 1766. 



* First marriage recorded by M. O'Neill. 

+ These names appear side by side on the rate books, down to 1781 — John Slater appearing in 1749; John 
Slateree, in 1753. One is rated from £26 to ,^58; the other from £?, to .£30. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



Api27 



Smith. vSmith. 

Amanda Smith m. Wm. Beardsley, 1S33. 
Ame Smith m. John Lewis, 1750. 
Andrew Smith and Rachel:' 

Harris, bap. Jan. 16, 1820. 
Lucretia, bap. Nov. 2, 1821. 
Ira Tuttle, bap. Aug. 13, 1824. 

Anna Smith m. Bennet Bronson, iSoi. 

Anson H. Smith m. Esther Atkins — both 
of Wolcott — May 12, 1827. 

Asahel Smith, s. of Anson, dec'd, m. 
Elizabeth Thomas, Nov. 12, 1S29. 

Augustus Smith of Plymouth [s. of James 
of Northfield] m. Catharine L. Cook 
[d. of Zenas], Dec. 6, 1837. 

Austin Smith d. Feb. 8, 1797, a. 83. Mar- 
garet, bis wife. d. Mch. 26, 1803.'' 

Austin Smith [Jr.] m. Sarah Hikcox, d. 
of Gideon, Mch. 20, 1765. 

1. Ame, b. Oct. 12, 1765. 

2. Levi, b. June 10, 1770; d. Feb. 5, 17S1. 

3. Sally, b. Sept. 12, 1779. 

4. Harvy, b. Dec. 23, 1783. 

Bathsheba Smith m. Alsoji Baldwin, 

177.S. 
Betsey Smith ni. Joseph Nichols, 1824. 
Catharine S. Smith m A. C. Hart, 1841. 
Cloe Smith m. Asa Scott, 17S9. 
David Smith and Ruth.-* 

1. Aaron, b. Apr. 19, 1771. 

2. David, b. Dec. 2, 1776. 

3. Junius, b. Oct. 2, 17S0. 

4. Lucius, b. Apr. q, 17S4. 

David Seely Smith, s. of John, m. Jane 
M. Fuller, d. of Nelson of Middlebury, 
Apr. 25, 1S46. 
I. A child, b. Apr. 7, 1847. 

Edward A. Smith m. Rachel Lewis, Nov. 

19, 1S35. 
Edwin Smith of New Haven m. Betsey 

Ann Nichols, Feb. 22, 1847. 
Elinor Smith m. Eph. Warner, 1739. 
Eliza Ann Smith d. Aug. 16, 1836, a. 61.'- 
Eliza R. Smith m E. (3. Adams, 185 1. 
Elizabeth Smith m. Joshua Guilford, 

1S24. 
Elmore Eben. Smith, s. of Leveret of 

Prospect, m. Marietta Woodruff, d. of 

Stephen of Southington, Apr. 4, 1S41. 

1. Emma Jane, b. June 20, 1S42. 

2. George Leverett, b. Jan. 18, 1844. 

3. Samuel Stephen, b. Feb. 15, 1846. 

Ephraim Smith d. Oct. 15, 1S06, a. 75. ' 
Widow of Ephraim d. Sept. i, 1808, 
a. 76. 

Esther Smith m. Isaac Byington. 

Ezekiel Smith, s. of Ezekiel of Wood- 
bridge, dec'd, m. Mary Frost, d. of 
David, Sept. 11, 1S06, and d. Dec. 9, 
1825. 



Smith. ' S^^TH. 

1. Loisa, b. Aug. 17, 1S07. 

2. Susan, b. Nov. 23, 180S. 

3. Isaac George, b. Rlay 29, 1810. 

4. Ezekiel Edward, b. Oct. 13, 1812. 

5. Roxana, b. Mch. 22, 1815. 

6. Mary, b. Sept, 16, 1817. 

7. Charles Allen, b. Feb. 7; d. Aug. 9, 1820. 
S. Sarah Ann., h. Sept. 5, 1821; d. Oct , 1822. 
<i. Sar.ih Ann, li. July 14, 1823. 

Fanny Smith m. Linus Stevens, 1S21. 
Fanny E. Smith m. Alonzo Isbell, 1842. 
Frances A. Smith m. G. C. Piatt, 1840. 
Gad Smith m. Elizabeth Bradley, Mch. 
I, 1764- 

I. Dorcas, b. May 30, 1765. 

George L. Smith m. Cynthia M. Isbell, 

Jan. 30, 1S40. 
Hannah Smith m. James Hikcox, 1766. 
Harriet E. Smith m. S. j\I. Judd, 1S40. 

Henry Smith, s. of Anson, m. Bolara 
Pardy, Feb. 28, 1S22. 

Henry M. Smith, b. June 1825, s. of Ar- 
chibald of Cornwall, in. May, 1S45, 
Jane E. Roberts, b. June, 1S26, d. of 
Nathaniel. 

I. Caroline, b. July i, 1846. 

Hobart Smith of Cheshire m. Adeline 
Holt, Feb. 7, 1847. 

Hubbard Smith m. Esther Farrel, Dec. 

20, 1826, and Ann Potter [d. of Lemuel], 

Sept. 6, 1S35. 
Isaac George Smith, s. of Ezekiel and 

grandson of Ezekiel, m. Marilla Hotch- 

kiss, d. of Amos Harlow of Prospect, 

Nov. 17, 1833. 

1. Susan F., b. Mch. 26, 1835. 

2. Mary J., b. Oct. 22, 1S36. 

3. George t"., b. Nov. 22, 1838. 

4. Robert M., b. Jan. 2, 1846. 

Marilla d. May 30, 184S, and Isaac ni. 
Mrs. Almira Smith, Aug. 15, 1S49. 

James Smith, s. of John, m. vSarah Spen- 
cer, d. of John— all of East Haddam — 
Jan. 6, 1736-7. He d. Mch. 23, 1777. 

1. James, b. July 30, 1739. 

2. Rebeckah, b. Sept. i, 1740; ni. Jos. Prichard. 

3. Rinner, b. Aug. 7, 1742. 

4. Reuben, b. Aug. 13, 1744. 

5. John, b. June 23, 1750. 

6. Samuel, b. Feb. 17, 1752. 

7. Eliphalet, b. May 18, 1755. 

8. Sarah, b. ,Mch. 13, 175S. 

James Smith, s. of James, m. Damei^as 
Stoddard, d. of Elisha of Woodbury, 
Dec. iS, 1760. 

1. Mary, b. Dec. 21, 1761. 

2. James, b. May 12, 1763. 

James Smith and Molly: 
She d. Feb. 9, 1801 [a. 31]. 

1. Zerviah, b. July 24, 17S9. 

2. Hanford, b. Aug. 28, 1791. 

3. James Fairchild, b. Jan. ig, iSoi. 



128AP 



HTSTORT OF WATERS URT. 



Smith. Smith. 

James Smith m. Sarah Blakeslee, Jan. 

29. lySg--* 

John Smith of Derby m. Abigail Gunn, 

Mch. 15, 1759.^ 
John Smith, s. of James, ni. Ruhamah 

Thompson, d. of Caleb of Harwinton, 

Nov. 17, 176S. 

1. 'I'homas, b. Oct. 4, 1769. 

2. John, b. Apr. 4, 1771. 

John Smith, s. of Ezekiel of Woodbridge, 
dec'd, m. Esther Frost, d. of Rev. 
Jesse, Feb. 22, iSoS. 

1. Clarissa, b. Dec. 23, 1808; m. Lutlier Todd. 

2. Sylvester, b. June 13, 1811. 

3. Lydia Ann, b. Feb. i, 1813; m. M. Kimball. 

4. Polly Amanda, b. July 11, 1816 [m. Ed.Welton]. 

5. David Seely, b. Apr. 7, 1819. 

6. Charles Junius, b. June 11, 1821; d. 1833. 

7. Irena, b. Aug. 10, 1823; m. W. B. Barnes. 

8. James Frost, b. Mch. 22, 1827. 

John A. Smith of Vernon m. Melisse E. 

Tattle, Mch. 20, 1S42. 
J. Edward Smyth m. Lucy A. Clark [d. 

of John], Jan. 1, 1S49. 
John W. Smith of Conway, Mass., m. 

Sarah M. Hickok [d. of Alanson R.], 

Apr. 23, 1S49. 

Joseph Smith [m. Oct. 11, 1722, Martha 
Beeman, b. July 16, 1695, d. of George 
of Derby]. 

3. Mary, b. Apr. 21, 1728. 

4. Susanna, b. Dec. 23, 1730. 

5. Anie, b. Mch. 29, 1734. 

6. Ruth, b. Sept. 13, 1740 [m. David Prichard]. 

Joseph Smith m. Hannah Mallory, Aug. 

21, 1753-'' 
Landon Smith m. Martha Osborn, d. of 

Daniel, July 19, 1777.'' 

Lawrence O. S. Smith of Naugatuck m. 
Eunice E. Sperry of Humphreysville, 
Sept. 2, 1S45. 

Lemuel O. Smith, see L. S. Osborn. 
Lewis Smith m. Clarry Nichols, Feb. 22, 

1829. 
Lois Smith m. Daniel Abbot, 1763. 
Lucy J. Smith m. Richard Morrow, 1S39. 
Lyman Smith m. Rebeckah Wooster, 

Dec. 17, 1S21. 
Lyman Smith of Woodbury m. Jcnett 

Norton, July 23, 1S24. 
Lyman P. Smith m. Marilla Sanford [d. 

of Lebeus], Nov. 20, 1S3S. 
Margaret Smyth m. John Daye, 1S50. 
Marshall Smith and Lucina: 

I. Phila Charlotte, b. Sept. 3, i8io; m. G. S. Wel- 
ton. 

Martin B. Smith m. Polly C. Frost, June 
3, 1 846. 

Mary Smith m. G. W. Denny, 1S47. 



Smith. Somers. 

Mary C. Smith m. .Milo Hine, 1S49. 
Nancy Smith m. Gideon O. Hotchkiss, 
1S30. 

Orson Smith, s. of Lemuel, m. Lydia 
Ann Judd, d. of Thomas, Aug. 2S, 
1S26. 

Philena Smith m. Gideon Hickcox, 1770. 

Ralph Smith of Washington m. Maria 
Ward of Nau., Nov. 23," 1842. 

Rebeccah H. Smith m. W. H. Scovill, 
1S41. 

Richard L. Smith of ]\lilford m. Lydia 
Ann Boughton, Oct. 9, 1839. 

Rosetta Smith m. James Hodson, 1846. 

Samuel Smith, s. of James, m. Agnes 
Leveston, d. of James of Wallingford, 
Aug. 2, 1769. 

1. Samuel Leveston, b. Apr. 27, 1770. 

Agnes d. May 7, 1770, and Samuel m. 
Lois Parker, Nov. 15, 1770. 

2. Lois, b. Dec. 27, 1771. 

3. James Woolsey, b. Nov. 9, 1773. 

Sarah Smith m. Nathan Beard, 1728. 
Sarah Smith m. Isaac Terrell, 1762. 
Sarah Smith m. Isaac Scott, 1767. 
Sarah Smith m. Stephen Warner, Jr., 

1792. 
Sheldon Smith m. Mille Downs — both of 

Wolcott— :May 30, 1825. 

Shelton Smith of Plymouth m. Charlotte 

Benham, Jan. i, 1S37. 
Solomon M. Smith of New York m. 

^Nlaria Clark, d. of Eli, May 13, 1820. 
Sybbel Smith m. Archibald Prichard, 

1782. 

Thankful Smith m. Edward Allen, 1S42. 
Wait Smith m. Sarah Scott, d. of David, 

Jan. 5, 1775. [He d. Sept. 15, 1805; 

she, Dec, 1828.] 

1. Garrit, b. Feb. 3, 1776 [d. Nov. 9, 1830]. 

2. Hannah, b. Apr. 22, 1778. 

William S. Smith of Steuben Co., N. Y., 
m. Sophia Bronson, Aug. 9, 1S37. 

Sarah Softly m. John Eggleston, 1851. 

David Somers formerly from Milford m. 
Almira Frisbie, d. of David of Wolcott, 
Oct. 17, 1830. 

1. Dwight L., b. May 28, 1832. 

2. Augusta A., b. in M'bury, Apr. 15, 1834. 

3. Joseph Hill, b. in Wol., June 24, 1836. 

4. Amelia R., b. in Wol., Sept. 2, 1840. 

5. Christine E., b. in Mil., June 5, 1844. 

6. Frederic, b. Apr. 15, 1847. 

David Somers of Woodbury m. Sarah 
Maria Upson [d. of Daniel], July 16, 
1836. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP129 



SOMERS. SOUTHMAYD. 

James P. Somers from ]\Iilford m. Re- 
becca Harrison, d. of Michael, dec'd, 
of Wolcott, Dec. 14, 1826. 

1. Catharine, b. Oct. 29, 1827; m. Stephen Har- 

rison. 

2. Mary Ann, b. Aug. 30, 1829; m. Douglass Malt- 

by. 

3. Pulaski, b. June 29, 1831. 

4. Elliott, b. Jan. 23, 1833. 

Jerusha Summers m. Anizi Beebe, 1802.'' 
Daniel Southmayd, s. of [Rev.] John, m. 

Hannah Brown, d. of Samuel, Mch. 24, 

174S9. 

X. Anna, b. Aug. 8, 1749 [m. after 1784, Esq. Good- 
rich of Chatham, and d. childless, 1809] . 

2. John, b. Aug. 8, 1751. 

3. Daniel, b. Oct. 23, 1753. 

Mr. Daniel Southmayd d. Jan. 12, 1754, 
about II o'clock at night [and Hannah 
m. in 1756, Joseph Spencer of Haddam, 
Major-General in Rev. War]. 
Dr. Daniel Southmayd, s. of Daniel, m. 
Prue Nichols, d. of Capt. George, Oct. 
31, 1773. [He probably lived in Had- 
dam.] 

Mr. John Southmayd [s. of William of 
Middletown, m. Susanna Ward, d. of 
William, 1700.] 

His first child was Esther, and born ye : 12th of 

Septembe in ye yeir 1701. 
His 2d, a daughter Susannah, b. January 5 = 

1703-4 (m. Thomas Bronson). 
Ye 3d, a daughter annah, b. Oct = 27 = 1706 = 

(m. Joseph Bronson). 
The 4th, A son, John, b. Jan. 21, 1710. 
The 5th, A son, Daniell, b. Aprill 19,= 1717. 

The above named Susanna d. Aug. 13, 

1741. 

The above named John d. Feb. 28, 

1742-3- 

The above named Anna Southmayd d. 

Aug. II, 1749. in the 43d year of her 

age. 

Susannah Southmayd, wife of Mr. John 

Southmayd, died Feb. 8th, between 

ten and Eleven of the clock at night. 

Anno Dom. 1751 2. 

The above named Daniell, son of John, 

deyed about 11 o'clock at night Jan. 12, 

1754. (All these, recorded by Mr. 
Southmayd. The next year another's 
pen records) 

Mr. John Southmayd died Nov. 14, 

1755, in the Eightyeth year of his age. 

John Southmayd, s. of [Rev.] John, m. 
MillecentGaylord, d. of Samuel of Mid- 
dletown, Apr. 25, 1739, and d. Feb. 28, 
1742-3, about twelve of the clock, in 
the 33d year of his age. His widow m. 
Timothy Judd, 1749. 

1. William, b. June 27, 1740. 

2. Samuel, b. Dec. 10, 1742. 

[John Southmayd, s. of Daniel, removed 
to Compton, New Hampshire. 

14 * 



Southmayd. Spencer. 

Prudence, b. Sept. 27, 1776. 
John Baker, b. Apr. 20, 1782. 
Daniel, b. Alch. 12, 1785. 
Levi, b. Dec. 13, 1786. 
Hannah, b. Jan. 2, 1789; d. 1815. 
William, b. Dec. 8, 1791. 
Ruth, b. Mch. 22, 1800. 
Dorothy, b. Nov. 22, 1796. 
Eiihu, b. Nov. 9, 1803.] 

Samuel Southmayd [s. of John, 2d] m. 
Dorcas Skinner, June 10, 1768. [He d. 
Aug. 18, 1 8 10; she, Apr., 1832, a. 85. 

1. Milliscent, b. Mch. 7, 1769; m. Uri Scovill. 

2. Philomela, b. May 25, 1771; m. Stephen Fenn. 

3. Samuel W., b. Sept., 1773; d. Mch. 4, 1813. 

4. Dorcas, b. Dec. 6, 1780; m. Aaron Dutton. 

5. Alma, b. Nov. 16, 1783; m. Benjamin Deforest, 

6. William Skinner, b. 1789; d. 1790.] 

William Southmayd, s. of John, dec'd, 
m. Irena Todd, d. of Sam., Oct. 16, 
1763 [and d. at Lake Champlain, 1777. 
Irena m. Mr. Wells of Northfieldj 
Mass.]. 

1. John William, b. Aug. 16, 1764. 

2. Althea, b. Jan. 21, 1767. 

3. Marcia, b. May 2, 1771. 

4. Almeria, b. Mch. 6, 1774. 

Susannah Southwell (?)m. A. D. Stevens, 

1S24. 
Jemima Sowrill m. Timothy Hopkins, 

1741. 
Mary Spellman m. D. il. Atwood, 1S51. 
[Ansel Spencer, s. of Isaac, m. Eunice 

Hine. 

1. Hopy Lord, b. 1789; d. Aug. 24, 1813. 

Ansel m. Loly Benham, 

2. Mary Curtis, b. Dec. 24, 1792. 

3. James, b. May 20, 1794; d. young. 

4. Eunice, b. July 5, 1796; d. young. 

5. James, b. 1799; d. 1806. 

6. W'illard, b. May 14, 1801. 

7. Ansel, b. Jan. 23, 1804. 

8. Shandy, b. Oct. 15, 1806; d. 1832. 

9. Henry W., b. Nov. 15, 1809. 

10. James, b. Ian. i, 1812. 

11. Catharine E., b. 181S.] 

Ansel Spencer, Junr., m. Jane Atwater, 

Apr. I, 1832. 
[Deac. Calvin Spencer m. Esther Lewis, 

d. of Samuel, Esq., Nov. 8, 17S6. 

1. Thomas, b. May 8, 1788. 

2. Lucian, b. Dec. 2, 1789; d. 1790. 

3. Harris, b. June 21, 1791. 

4. Locky, b. Nov. 6, 1793; m. Selden Lewis. 

5. Lucian, b. Sept. i, 1705. 

6. Esther, b. Sept. 27, 1797; m. A. Russell. 

7. Calvin, b. July 8, 1800. 

8. Gustavus, b. Mch. 20, 1808.] 

Calvin Spencer, Jr., m. Hannah Riggs, 

Jan. II, 1829, and d. 1837. 
Candice Spencer m. Ashbel Munson, 

179S. 
Elihu Spencer, s. of Isaac, m. RuthShep- 

pard, an adopted dau. of Rev. Abram 

Fowler, Feb. 15, 1793. 
Henry W. Spencer [s. of Ansel] m. Eliza 

H. Beecher, Oct. 23, 1836. 



130AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Spencer. Sperry. 

Henry Spencer m. Mary E. Lum— both 
of Oxford — Sept. 19, 1S50. 

Isaac Spencer [b. May 3, 1723, at East 
Haddam; s. of Isaac, b. 167S (and Mary 

Selden ); s. of Samuel (and Hannah 

Blachford or Blachfield); sixth child of 
Serg. Jared of Cambridge, Mass., 1634; 
m. Temperance Goodspeed of East 
Haddam about 1750, and d. 17S7. 

Temperance, b. 1751; in. Samuel Bronson. 
Mary. Calvin; ni. 1786.] 

Children b. in Waterbury: 

Selden, b. Nov. 5, 1757. 
Rebecca, b. Sept. 18, 1759. 
Elihu, b. Jan. 13, 1762. 
[Ansel, b. Oct. 21, 1763.] 
Samuel, d. Jan. 10, 1760. 
Asahel, d. Jan. 11, 1760. 
Isaac, d. Oct. 13, 1803, a. 33.9 

Isaac Spencer m. I\Irs. Ama Tyler — both 

of Cheshire — Oct. 15, 1S26. 
Lawrence [Sterne] Spencer, s. of Elihu, 

m. Maria Beecher, d. of Daniel, Apr. 

II, 1827. 

Leonard Spencer m. Sarah L. Hoadley, 
d. of Chester, Mch. 7, 1S21. 

Samuel Spencer:'^ 

Polina, bap. June 16, 1782. 

Sarah Spencer m. James Smith, 1736. 

Willard Spencer [s. of Ansel] m. Marcia 
Burton, June 27, 1S30. 

1. Susan, b. Sept. 22, 1831. 

2. Frederick Albert, b. Nov. 7, 1833. 

3. Joseph Burton, b. Mch. 27, 1836. 

4. William Ansel, b. June 24, 1740. 

5. Mary Elizabeth, b. Oct. 28, 1847. 

Abel Sperry m. Miliscent Warner, d. of 

Stephen, Feb. 10, 1773. 
Abigail Sperry m. Jonathan Scott, 1736. 

Alfred C. Sperry of Bethany m. Harriet 
.A. Isbell, Sept. 6, 1S42. 

Allen Sperry and Abigail from North- 
Held;' 

Polly, bap. May 4, 1800. 
,A child bap. July 22, 1804. 

Anson Sperry, s. of Allen, m. Huldah 
Peck, d. of Henry of Burlington, Feb. 
4, iSii. 

Anson Sperry, s. of Jacob, m. Lois Up- 
son, d. of John of Southington, Apr. 
23, iSio. 

1. Candice, b. Nov. 24, 1810 [m. Samuel Croft]. 

2. Marcus, b. Sept. 8, 1812. 

3. John Augustus, b. July 6, 1814 [m. Mary McCal- 

lum]. 

4. Emily, b. Aug. 6, 1817; m. Restore Carter. 

5. Charles Anson, b. July 24, 1819. 

6. Charlotte Eliza, b. .Apr. 4, 1823; m. Robert Lang. 

7. Sarah Jane, b. Feb. 25, 1825 [m. A. Fisher]. 

8. Mary Cornelia, b. Mch. 12, 1828; d. 1833. 

9. Ann Ophelia, b. Mch. 5, 1830. 

Betsey Sperry m. E. N. Buckingham, 

1S34. 



Sperkv. Sperry. 

Corydon S. Sperry [s. of Hezekiah (and 
Luanna Stillman); s. of Timothy 
Sperry and Hannah Pardee] m. Catha- 
rine E. Leavenworth [d. of Mark], 
June 10, 1835. 

Earl Sperry m. Anna Baldwin of Wood- 
bridge, ^lay 28, 1823. 

Edwin Sperry, s. of Marcus, m. Mary 
Miles, d. of Samuel formerly of ]Mil- 
ford. May i, 1S31. 

1. Charlotte E., b. in New Haven, June 24, 1832; 

m. David Abbott. 

2. Sarah Rebecca, b. in New Haven, Feb. 2, 1834. 

3. Samuel Marcus, b. Dec. 15, 1836. 

4. Catharine Lucretia, 1). Oct. 23, 1840. 

5. Henry Tlieodore, b. Aug. 25, 1844. 

Elijah Sperry's record of the birth of his 
children by his w'xie, Anne: 

1. Anne, b. in Woodbridge, Jan. 8, 1777. 

Elijah's record, by his wife Mary: 

2. Hannah, b. Jan. 16, 17S0. 

3. Mary, b. Aug. 30, 1781. 

4. Enos, b. Aug 25, 1783. 

5. Rachel, b. Nov. 21, 1785. 

6. Elam, b. Apr. 21, 1788. 

7. Daniel Smith, b. July 21, 1790. 

8. Peter Vanorder, b. Sept. i, 1793. 

Emily Sperry m. Austin Pierpont, 1S47. 

Eunice Sperry m. L. O. Smith, 1845. 

Jacob Sperry, s. of Jacob, ^ec'd, m. 
Sarah Perkins, d. of David — all of New 
Haven — Sept. i, 1773. 

1. Huldah, b. May 3, 1775; m. Noah Bronson. 

2. Marcus, b. 10 P.M., Mch. 14, i 

and ■"'779- 

3. Sarah, b. i a.m., Mch. 15, ) m. Dan. Cook. 

4. Lydia, b. Oct. 25, 1783; m. Gideon Piatt, Jr. 

5. Anson, b. Mch. 28, 1786. 

6. Charry, b Sept. 21, 1792 [m. Clark Sperry]. 

Jesse Sperry, s. of Samuel • of New 
Haven, m. Hannah Upson, d. of Capt. 
Stephen, May 8, 1759. [He d. Apr. 14, 
1823, a. 90; she, Feb. 8, 1818, a. 82.] 

1. A dau., b. Jan. 13, 1761. 

2. Lue, b. Apr. 7, 1763. 

3. Susanna, b. Oct. 3, 1764; m. Amasa Cow-el. 

4. Leava, b. June 20, 1768 [m. Sam. Johnson], 

5. Sarah, b. Sept. 20, 1770. 

6. Noah, b. June 18, 1773. 

Jesse Sperry and Hannah:' 

.Marcus, Samuel, and Sheldon, bap. Apr. 28, 

1817. 
Garry, Mary Ann, and loseph, bap. .Apr. 11, 

1821. 

Luther Sperry, s. of Benjamin from 
Cheshire, m. Mary Verona Holt, d. of 

Philemon, 

1. Mary Ulissa, b. Dec. 7, 1830; m. Chas. Frost. 

Lyman Sperry:' 

Phebe Norton, bap. Feb. 26, 1804. 
Adna, bap. Oct. 5, 1806. 

[Lyman's wife d. Oct. 10, 1S07, a. 29]; 
wife Lydia from Bethany, 1809. 

Lyman, bap. May 20, 1810. 
Lydia, bap. Oct. 13, 1811. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



APl.31 



Sperry. 



vStandly. 



Betsey, bap. Feb. 4, 1813. 
Levinus, bap. Sept. 18, 1814. 
Ira Peck, bap. Mch. 18, 1818. 

Marcus Sperry, s. of Capt. Jacob, m. 
Rebecca Carrington, cl. of Sam. of 
Woodbridge, Mch. 25, 1807, and d. 
Aug. 31, 1811. 

1. Edwin, b. Mch. 8, 1808. 

2. Hosmer, b. Feb. 7, 1810. 

Martha Sperry m. Willis Downs, 1S45. 

Marvin Sperry of Woodbridge m. Lavin- 
ia Gaylord of Hamden, Feb. 24, 1S32. 

Ruth Sperry, wid., d. Mch. 15, 1803, a. 

Samuel Sperry, s. of Samuel of New 
Haven, m. Mary Robard, d. of Abial, 
Apr. 30, 1761. 

1. Abi, b. Feb. 10, 1762. 

2. Mary, b. July 20, 1764. 

Samuel Sperry, b. May 6, 1807, s. of 
Jesse, m. Apr. 28, 1832, Laura Mecam, 
b. Nov. 20, 1809, d. of James of Wash- 
ington. 

1. Cornelia, b. June 15, 1833. 

2. Sarah, b. Apr. 28. 1835. 

3. Augusta, 1). Oct. 20, 1838. 

4. Franklin, h. Apr. 2, 1844. 

David A. Sprague from Pittsfield, Mass., 
b. Dec, 1803, m. Oct. 26, 1S28, Ann 
Downs, b. Mch. 5, 1S02, d. of David. 

1. ]\Iary Ann, b. Dec. 28, 1830. 

2. David Elias, b. Feb. 8, 1833. 

3. Aurelia Maria, b. Oct. 3, 1835. 

Edwin Stanley m. Margaret Corcoran, 
July 12, 183s, and d. Jan. 31, 183S, a. 
27.- 

The record of Samuel Standly. Samuel 
Standly, s. of Left. John of Farming- 
ton was mar. to Elizabeth, d. of Abra- 
ham Bronson of Lime, July 15, 1702. 

Their first child, Samuel, b. Mch. 22, 1703. 

Their second child, A Braham, b. Apr. 18, 1705. 

Their third child, John, b. Jan. 4, 1707. 

Their fourth child, Esther, b. Nov. 9, 1709. 

The fifth was twins, Ebenezer and Annah, Mch. 
8, 1713. 

The seventh, a datter, Elizabeth, b. at Farming- 
ton [Mch. 13], 1715. 

The eighth, Asa, b. at Farmington, Aug. 10, 
1717. 

The fifth, Ebenezer, dyed IMch. 21, 1713. 

[Samuel Standly, Jr., m. Ame Bronson, 

Sept. 22, 1727, and, in 1766, Widow 

Prudence Pomeroy. He d. 1793-] 
[Thomas Standly, s. of Capt. John of 

Farmington m. Anne Peck, d. of Rev. 

Jeremiah, 1690. He d. April, 1713; 

she. May, 171S.] 
Timothy Standly [s. of Lieut. John] was 

borne June the 6, 1689. 
Timothy Standly, s. of Capt. John of 

Farmington, d. Nov. 12, 1728. ilary 



Standly. Steele. 

[Strong of Windsor], his wife, d. Sept. 

30, 1722. 
William Stanley, b. Feb. 17, 180S. m. 

Sarah James in Birmingham, England 

[in 1823]. 

1. Ann, b. Sept., 1826; m. F. A. Warner. 

2. William, b. Mch., 1829. 

3. James, b. Jan. 2, 1832. 

William d. [in Bloomfield. N. J., 1S36] 
and wSarah m. Joseph Shipley. 

William Stanley's wife, Maria, d. Aug. 
7, 1S34, a. 24.- 

William Stanley m. Phebe Forrest, June 

9. 1850. 

Bernard Stapleton m. Bridget Cunning- 
ham. Ai:g. 3, 1851.^ 
Mrs. Olive Starks, bap. Aug. 16, 1778.'- 
Eliza Stebbins m. Lauren Austin, 1S37. 

Lewis Stebbins, s. of Medad of Long- 
meadow, Mass., m. Laura Bouton, d. 
of John, 1816. 

1. Mary Minerva, b. Feb. 10, 1817. 

2. George Washington, b. Aug. 11, 1819. 

3. Eliza Olive, b. Nov. i, 1821. 

4. Sarah Maria, b. June 20, 1823. 

Ann P. Steele m. L. B. FoUett, 1836. 

Austin Steele, s. of Daniel and Rebecca, 
m. Polly Beecher, b. Aug. 2, 1793, d. of 
Jonathan and Anna of Brookfield, in 
Wat., Aug. [31], 1810. 

1. Henry Baldwin, b. Jan. 22, 1S12. 

2. Caroline R., b. Mch. 13, 1820; m. G. W. Bene- 

dict. 

3. Frederic Austin, b. Aug. 29; d. (.)ct. 4, 1828. 

4. Edward, b. July 17, 1835; d. Mch. 29,- 1839. 

Daniel Steele [b. in Derby, July, 1768, s. 
of Capt. Bradford] m. Rebecca Clark, 
1790 (Derby History says " 1789")- 

1. Austin, b. Sept. 17, 1790. 

2. Daniel, b. Nov. 11, 1792. 

3. Ashbel, b. Jan. 31, 1796. 

Rebecca d. [Mch. 8, 1796], and Daniel 
m. ]\Iargaret Welton, d. of Richard, 
Sept. 20, 1797. [He d. Jiine 24, 1835, 
a. 67.] 

4. Ransom, b. Sept. 2, 1798. 

5. Rebecca, b. Aug. 15, 1800; m. N. A. Bidwell. 

6. Richard, b. July 6, 1802. 

7. Clark M., b. Sept. 21, 1805; d. May, 1811. 

8. Sherman, b. Jan. 5, 1808. 

9. Betsey C, b. July 13, 1810; m. Lewis Beecher. 

10. Davis C, b. Sept. 8, 1813. 

11. George H., b. Mch. 15, 1820; d. at Libertyville, 

111., Sept., 1847. 

Daniel Steele, Jr., s. of Daniel, Esq., m. 
Sally Richards, d. of Col. Street of 
Wolcott, Nov. 13, 1S13. 

I. William A., b. Aug. 13, 1S14. 

Mary Steele m. W. H. Jones, 1825. 
Mary Ann Steele m. S. A. Castle, 1846. 
Ransom Steele m. Betsey Beecher, Oct. 
4, 1821. 



132^1' 



HISTORY OF WATERS URT. 



Steele. Stiles. 

Richard Steele [s. of Daniel] m. Susan 

.'Maria Ray, Apr. 3, 1S31. 
Sherman Steele m. Catharine M. Clark 

[d. of John], June ig, 1850. 
William S. Steele m. Caroline Jones of 

Cheshire, Nov. 8, 1837. 
Harriet Stetson m. O. W. Minard, 1S37. 
Abigail Stevens m. Eben. Hikcox, 1729. 
Alfred Stevens m. Julia Payne, Nov 17, 

1S23. 

Alfred Stevens m. Eliza Gaylord, d. of 
Allen of Hamden. 

Eliza Jane, b. Feb. 16, 1829; m. R. B. Pardee. 

Alfred d., and Eliza m. Joseph Lines. 

Bennet Stevens m. Minerva Grilley, Sept. 
14, 1S34. 

Elisha Stevens d. Mch. S, 1813.^ 
Elisha M. Stevens ni. Amy C. Hoadley, 
Aug. 19, 1S24. [vShe d. 1S30.] 

Elizabeth Stevens m. Jonas Weed, 1734. 
Elvira Stevens m. W. D. Beardsley, 

1S16. 
Esther Stephens m. P. Freeman, 1S25. 

(Col.) 

Fanny Stevens m. Wm. Bateman, 1831. 
George S. Stevens, s. of Ashbel of Nau- 

gatuck, m. INIary E. Scott, d. of Joel, 

Oct. 15, 1S45. 

Mary Eliza, b. July 4, 1846. 

Hannah Stephens m. Abr. Andrews, 
1702. 

Hershell Stevens of New Haven m. Cla- 
rissa Bouton, May 24, 1821. 

Horace Stevens of Plymouth m. Sophia 
Kinney of Wolcott, Monday, Dec. 19, 

1S36. 

John Stevens: 

Abijah, Emily, and James, bap. June 10, i82i.9 

Lauren S. Stevens, s. of David, m. Rox- 
ana Hall, d. of Heman of Wolcott, 
Sept. 30, 1838. 

I. Eliza Ann, b. Sept. 10, 1839. 

Linus Stevens of Cheshire m. Fanny 
vSmith, Dec. 5, 1821. 

Olive Stevens m. Seth Castle, 1800.'' 

Orange M. Stevens of West Stockbridge, 

Mass., m. Henrietta J. Lewis, d. of 

Chauncey, Aug. 13, 1S26. 
Rebecca Stevens m. William Hilman, 

r^49. 
S. Maria Stevens m. S. W. Upson, 1820. 
Sarah Stewart m. Rev. Jabez Chadwick, 

1801. 
Mabel Stiles m. Capt. Gid. Hotchkiss, 

1763. 



Stillwkll. Stow. 

Benjamin Stillwell, s. of Daniel of Dut- 
chess Co., m. Mary Benet, d. of Henry 
of New Fairfield, Oct. 9, 1754. 

I. rianiel, b. Feb. 4, 1755. 'k 

Anson Stocking m. Flora Coe [d. of Abi- -) 

jab] of Torrington, May 15, 1S25. ' 

Anson G. Stocking, b. Mch. 30, 1814, s. 
of Anson of Torrington, m. Sarah A. 
Frost, d. of Stephen C, Nov. 10, 1839. 

1. Henry Moor, b. Aug. 19, 1840. 

2. George Anson, b. May 25, 1844. 

John M. Stocking, b. May 16, iSii, s. of 
Anson of Torrington, m. Sept. 3, 1S34, 
Emeline Newell from Southington, b. 
Oct. 3, 1S04. 

1. Harriet Newell, b. May 23, 1836. 

2. Gilbert Miles, b. Dec. 22, 1838. 

3. William, b. Dec. 11, 1840. 

Samuel J. Stocking, s. of Anson, m. 
Orril Coe, d. of Abijah— all of Torring- 
ton — Mch. 20, 1834. 

1. Eliza Ann, b. in Torrington, June 22, 1837. 

2. Charlotte, b. Nov. 27, 1839. 

3. Harvey Miles, b. May 23, 1843. 

Almira A. Stoddard m. H. Deming, 1831. 
Damaris Stoddard m. Jas. Smith. 1760. 

Leverett Stoddard of Litchfield m. Cath- 
arine Bish()p, Sept. 6, 1840. 
Maria Stoddard m. W. AV. Allen, 1841. 

Philo Stoddard from ^Middlebury ra. 
Nancy Hickox, d. of Timothy, Nov. 14, 
1827. 

1. David Sherman, b. Jan. 29, 1830. 

2. Edwin Ruthven, b. Jan. 16, 1835. 

3. Dwight Frank-lin, b. in Middlebury, Jan. 6, 1839. 

Sampson Stoddard and Susanna:^ 

Prudence, b. July 11, 1775. 
[L)r.] Abiram, b. Jan. 27, 1777. 
Susa Nettleton, b. Mch. 26, 1779. 

Susanna d. Apr. 24, 1779, and Samp- 
son m. Amy Gooding (Goodwin ?), Nov. 
22, 1780. 

William, b. Sept. 30, 1781. 
Goodwin, b. I\Iay 8, 1783. 

[Truman] Stoddard: 

Clara, b. Se]n. 12, 1803. 
Philo, b. Oct. 20, 1805^ 

William H. Stoddard m. Lucelia M. 

Cadwell of Avon, Sept. 17, 1S4S. 
Dothea Stone m. Young Love Cutler, 

1784.3 
Ashbel Storrs of Derby m. Harriet Tir- 

rell of Naugatuck, Feb. 24, 1845. 
Oliver Stoughton m. Sarah Sanford, Oct. 

29, 1787.^ 

1. Sophia, b. Aug. g, 1788. 

2. Justin Leavitt, Nov. 17, 1789. 

Daniel Stow [and Elizabeth Atkins] > 
first child b. in Waterbury: 

Samuel, b. Sept. 12, 1749. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP133 



Stow. Sutliff. 

Daniel Stow d. Mch. 22, 1750. 

[Heirs: Daniel, d. Sept. i6, 1758, Ebenezer, 
Samuel, Elizabeth, Luce, and Mary.] 

Josiah Stow, s. of Daniel, m. Esther 
Judd, d. of Samuel, Apr. 24, 1760. 

1. Esther, b. Jan. 22; d. Feb. 6, 1761. 

2. Esther, b. Sept. 18, 1762. 

3. David, b. Apr. 6, 1764. 

Samuel Stow m. Elizabeth Benedict, 
Nov. 14, 1780.^ 

1. Abel, b. Nov. 22, 1781. 

2. Philemon, b. Sept. 5, 17S3. 

Thomas Stow of Middletown m. Harriet 
Warner of vSalem, Nov. 8, 1835. 

William Stow of Ohio m. Lncene Upson, 
d. of Mark, Mch. i, 1S24. 

Lydia Streeter m. Lewis Parsons, 1S51. 

David Strickland [d. 1754]. His widow, 
Lois, m. Samuel Scott, 1756. 

[Heirs: JMary Doolittle, Elizabeth, John, Abiah, 
w. of Nathaniel Edwards, Jr., Samuel, and 
Persis.] 

John Stricklin, s. of David, m. Hannah 
Prichard, d. of James, dec'd, July 15, 
1757. [He d. Oct., 1761, and] Hannah 
m. Nath'l Sutliff. 

1. David, b. Jan. 13, 1759. 

2. Laurain, m. Cyrus Gnlley, 1776. 

Adinah Strong of Southbury m. Anne 
Scott of Salem, May 17, I77'9.^ 

Esther Strong m. E. R. Lampson, 1851. 
Hannah Strong m. Jesse Hickcox, 1775. 
Hiel B. Strong of Derby m. Susan E. 

Trowbridge of New Haven, July 6, 

1840. 
Jerome B. Strong of Bethlem m. Julia 

Camp of Middlebtu-y, Mch. 17, 1S35. 
Johanna Strong m. Benj. Warner, 1720. 
Maria Strong m. Jarvis Johnson, 1S32. 
Polly Strong m. Silas Porter, 1S02. 
Sarah Strong m. Thomas Clark, 1717. 
Sarah Strong m. Theoph. Baldwin, 1776. 
Sarah Strong m. Lucius Hine, 1835. 
Abel Sutliff, s. of John, m. Sarah Ford, 

d. of Barnabas, Oct. 23, 1745. She d. 

Sept. 14, 1777. 

1. Dinah, b. Dec. 4, 1746. 

2. Abel, b. Aug. 23, 1751. 

3. Darius, b. Mch. 18, 1756; d. Sept. 26, 1776. 

4. Lucas, b. Nov. 4, 1768 (1758?) 

Abel Sutliff, s. of Abel, m. Charity Bar- 
ber, Nov. 15, 1770. 

1. Barna (?), b. Jan. 16, 1772. 

2. Miles, b. July 29, 1773. 

3. Sarah, b. Mch. 27, 1776; d. July 26, 1777. 

4. Sarah, b. Feb. 21, 1778. 

John Sutliff d. Oct. 14, 1752, a. 77. Han- 
nah, his wife, d. Nov., 1761. 

[John, b. in Durham, Mch. 8, 1713-14. 
Abel. Hannah, m. Thomas Harrison. 



Sutliff. Sutliff. 

Mary, m. Benj. Harrison. 

Lydia, m. Jonathan Foot. 

Abigail, m. John How. 

Elizabeth, m. Dr. Thomas Foot. 

Deborah, b. in Durham, Apr. 10, 1710; m.' 

Stephen Welton — all these, e.xcept John bap. 

in Bran ford. 
Martha, b. in Durham, Apr. 19, 1712; m. Eleazer 

Scott. 
Dinah, bap. in Durham, Sept. 7, 1716; m. Josiah 

Bronson.] 

John Sutliff, s. of John (above), m. Anne 
Ives, d. of Thomas of New Haven, 
July 29, 1741. 

1. John, b. Mch. 21, 1743-4. 

Anne d. Aug. 5, 1746 [a. 30], and John 
m. Martha Basset, d. of Samuel of New 
Haven, Apr. g, 1747. [He d. Jan. 27, 
1790, a. 76; she d. 1777, a. 67.] 

2. Hannah, b. Nov. 18, 1747; m. Daniel Barthol- 

omew. 

3. Samuel, b. Nov. 11, 174Q. 

4. Anne, b. Nov. 10, 1752; m. John Warner, Jr. 

5. Martha, b. June 26, 1755. 

John Sutliff, Jr., s. of Capt. John (above), 
m. Lois Curtiss, d. of Samuel, Nov. 5, 
1770. 

1. Thomas, b. Nov. 2, 1771. 

2. Joseph, b. Apr. 18, 1773; d. Aug. 4, 1777. 

3. Anna, b. Mch. 14, 1775; d. Aug. 8, 1777. 

4. Lois, b. Apr. 27, 1777; m. [Ira Tompkins and] 

David Warner. 

5. Anna, b. Feb. 10, 1779. 

6. John, b. Feb. 7, 17S1.4 

Joseph Sutliff, s. of Joseph, m. wid. Zer- 
viah (Webster) Cobb of Bolton, Apr. 2, 
1771. He d. Oct. I, 1795. 

1. Zerviah, b. Jan. 29, 1772; m. Benj. Hickox, and 

Gideon Curtis. 

2. Joseph, b. Dec. 27, 1773. 

3. Michael, b. Feb. i, 1776. 

4. Lydia, b. Feb. i, 1778. 

5. Abiathar, b. May 7, 1780. 
fi. Nathan, b. Apr. 4, 17S2. 

Nathaniel Sutliff, s. of Joseph, m. Han- 
nah Strickland, widow [of John and d. 
of James PrichardJ. 

1. Titus, b. July 25, 1764; d. Apr. 28, 1774. 

2. Hannah, h. Oct. 8, 1766. 

3. Anna, b. Nov. 7, 1768. 

4. Nathaniel, b. Dec. 12, 1770. 

5. John, b. Feb. lo, 1773. 

6. Titus, b. Dec. i'8, 1774. 

7. Ruth, b. Mch. 15, 177S; m. Thomas Richard- 

son, Jr. 

8. Sarah Tibbals, b. May 28, 1780. 

9. Elizabeth, b. Nov. 3, 1782. 

Hannah d. Jan. 9, 1791, and Nathaniel 
m. Irene, wid. [of John] Selkrig, Nov. 
3. 1791- 
Samuel Sutliff, s. of Capt. John, m. Annis 
Humaston, d. of Caleb, July 5, 1775. 

1. Betsey, b. Feb. 8, 1776. 

2. Martha, b. Oct. 29, 1778. 

3. Rocksy (Ro.xa), b. Mch. 3, 1780. 

4. Giles, b. Mch. 18, i782.'J 

5. Content, b. Jan. 28, 1784. 

6. Asenath, b. Nov. 28, 1785. 

7. Huldah, b. Nov. 23, 1787. 

Sarah Sutliff m. Timothy Scott, 1757. 



134AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Sutton. Taylor. 

Abraham Sutton d. Oct. 20, 1758, and 
hear his things — is written upon a slip 
of paper, pasted upon the Record. 

Ann Sutton m. James Carberry, 1S24. 

Isaac Sutton d. Mch. 22, 1840, a. 86." 

Ann, his wife, d. Apr. 25, 1836, a. 78. 
Richard Sutton, s. of Isaac, ra. Sallv 

Bronson, July 27. 1S28. [She d. Mch. 

20, 1S34, and] Richard m. Julia A. 

Candee, d. of Moses of Oxford, Mch. 

29, 1835- 

I. James Carberry, b. Apr. lo, 1S36. 

Richard d. Jan. 22, 1S42, and Julia m. 
Gilbert Prichard. 
[Walter Swain d. 1767, and] :\Iary, his 
widow, m. David Arnold. 

Joshua H. Swan m. Louisa A. Marr, 
Feb. I, 1S50. 

Robert Swan and Agnes Porter — both 
from Scotland — m. Jan., 1842. 

William, b. June 9, 1845. 

James F. Swift m. Hannah S. Anderson, 
Dec. 22, 1S47. 

Charlotte Taft m. John Adams, 1S50. 

Dorothy Talmage m. Stephen Hopkins, 

1747- 
[Ichabod Talmage m. Hannah Minor, 

Mch. 9, 1774.] 

Jacob Talmage, b. July 28, iSoo, s. of 
Jacob of Plymouth, ni. Chloe Hickco.x, 
d. of Timothy. She d. Nov. 24, 184S. 

Nancy Maria, b. May 22, 1S32; d. Dec. 11, 1S44. 

Josiah Tatmag (Talmage) and Hannah: 

II. Margara, b. June 21, 1760. 

Lucinda Talmadge m. G. W. Pusha, 
1849. 

Charles Taylor of Newtown ni. Mary 
Ann Tomlinson, May 5, 1834.- 

David Taylor, s. of John of Wethers- 
field, m. Jemima Judd [d. of John], 
July 14, 1760. 

1. John, b. Mch. 29, 1761 [m. Elizabeth Hale, wid. 

of Dr. Samuel Rose.] 

Jemima d. May 12, 1761, and David ni. 
Huldah, relict of Joseph Fairchild, 
June 24, 1762. He d. Aug. 19, 1801 [a. 
63; she, Mch. 1, 1823, a. 90]. 

2. Cloe, b. Mch. 27, 1763; d. July 6, 1780. 

3. David, b. Oct. 8, 1771. 

David Taylor, Jr., s. of David, m. Mil- 
hscent Lewis, d of Isaac [Booth], 
dec'd, June 13, 1791. 

1. Lewi.s, b. Nov. 3, 1791. 
•2. Chloe, b. Feb. 17, 1796. 
3. Sophia, h. in Canaan, Apr. 13, iSoo. 

Elnathan Taylor and Desire [Blaksley, 
d. of Ebenezer, Jr. ; she was b. in New 



Taylor. Terrell. 

Haven, Nov., 1708, and m. there, Dec. 
26, 1727.] 

1. Mary, b. in North Haven, Jan. 9, 172S-9. 

2. Nathan, b. in North Haven, Nov. n, 1730. 

3. Desire, b. Sept. 6, 1732. 

4. John, b. Apr. 5, 1735. 

(This entry m.arked " Removed.") 

Mary D. F. Taylor m. Rev. J. L. Clark, 
1S4S. 

Samuel Taylor from Birmingham, Eng., 
b. Aug. 24, iSii, m. Dec. i, 1S33, Har- 
riet M. Price from Attleborough, Mass., 
b. Aug. 21, 1S12. 

1. Harriet Jane, b. Aug. 23, 1834. 

2. Ann Maria, b. Mch.13, 1838. 

3. Samuel Slater, b. Sept. 5, 1841. 

Theodor Taylor, s. of John of Glaston- 
bury, m. Bette Frost, d. of Samuel, 
Mch. I, 17S1. 

1. Theodore, b. June 12, 1782. 

2. William, b. June 30, 1785. 

3. Timothy Newton, b. Oct. 28, 1788. 

Wealthy Taylor d. Dec. 19, 1841, a. 49.- 

Aaron Terrell, s. of Josiah, m. Sarah 

Warner, d. of Obadiah, Jan. 23, 1760. 

1. Tryphena, b. Jan. 23, 1761. 

2. Esther, b. July 28, 1762. 

3. Orpha, b. Oct. 9, 1764. 

4. Elias, b. Sept. 20, 1766. 

Alvin Terrell's wife d. Jan. 31, 1S45, a. 

71.- 

Amos Terrell, s. of Gamaliel, m. Eliza- 
beth Greele, d. of Heu, Mch. 7, 17O4. 

1. Amos, b. Nov. 24, 1764. 

2. Philena, b. Jan. 28, 1766. 

Benjamin Terrell, s. of Gamaliel, m. 
Lois Andrews, Dec. 29, 1756. 

1. Lucy, b. Nov. 4, 1757. 

2. Sarah, b. Aug. 13, 1759. 

Lois d. July 30, 1761, and Benjamin m. 
Mary Robbards, Dec. 14, 1763. He d. 
June 20, 1796. 

3. Ame, b. Sept. 17, 1764. 

4. Lois, b. Feb. 14, 1767; m. Daniel Abbot. 

5. Joseph, b. July 19, 1769. 
Elizabeth, bap. Feb. 28, 1773.- 

Benjamin Terrell m. Electa Cook, d. of 
Jonathan. 

Charles Cook, bap. Oct. 13, 1816. 

Charlotte Terrel m. Albon Hoppen,iSo8. 
Clarissa S. Terrel m. William A. Root, 
1S26. 

David Terrell m. Emeline Nichols, Sept. 

19. 1S30. [He d. June 12, 1S31; she, 

Nov. 4, 1S34.] 
Elihu Terrel [s. of Josiah] m. Elizabeth 

Hickox, d. of Gideon, Apr. 20, 1783.' 
Elisha Terrel m. Lucinda Terrel, Jan. 

II, 17S4.' 
Emily G, Terrell m. Judson Bronson,. 

1S27. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP 135 



Terrell. Terrell. 

Enoch Terrell, a Baptist, d. Mch. 9. 1S04, 

a. 62.9 
Eunice Terrell m. G. P. Warner, 1S31. 
Experience Terrell d. Mcli. 12, 1S20, a. 

80.' 
[Gamaliel Terrell of New Milford m. 

Elizabeth Scott. May 17, 1725, and d. 

1769. Chil. b. in New Milford: 

1. Joshua, b. Dec. iS, 1725. 

2. Benjamin, b. Apr. 17, 1728. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Jan. 14, 1729; m. Robert Scott. 

4. Amos, b. May 11, 1732. 

5. Mercy, b. Dec. 22, 1733; d. June 23, 1737. 

6. Mercy, b. Apr. 4, 1738] m. Henry Grilley. 

Hannah E. Terrel m. M. Wooster, 1S22. 

Hannah Terrel m. S. P. Treat, 1S42. 

Harriet Terrell m. Ashbel Storrs, 1S45. 

Henry Terrell of Watertown m. ]\Irs. (?) 
Rebeckah Merriman, Aug. 24, 1S2S. 

Horatio Terrel m. wid. Sarah B. Hay- 
den, Dec. 28, 1S26. 

Ichabod Terrell m. ilch. i, 17S4. Rhoda 
Williams.'' [He was the grandfather 
of 92 children. 

I. Tillotson, b. May i, 17S3; m. in 1S04, Electa 
Wilmot, b. 1786, d. of Elisha and Hannah 
(Gladdin). They were the first white pair to 
settle in Ridgeville, Ohio, reaching that place 
with their children, Horatio, Eliza and Alonzo, 
Tuly 6, 1810, after a journey of seven weeks 
from Waterbury. Their d. Lucinda, b. Dec. 
19, 1812, m. Laurel Beebe, s. of Chester, who 
has furnished much Beebe and Terrel informa- 
tion. 

2. Lvdia, b. Nov. i, 1787; m. James Emmons. 

3. Philander, b. 1789; m. Lora Beebe, d. of Bor- 

den. 

4. Oliver, b. Sept. 2, 1791; m. Anna Bunnel. 

5. Lucinda, b. Nov. 6, 1795. 

6. Orpha, b. May 2, 1798. 

7. Ichabod, b. Oct. i, 1800. 

8. Elihu Franklin, b. Jan. 3, 1802. 

9. Horace, b. Aug. 10, 1803. 
10. Henry, b. Apr. 7, 1806.] 

Irijah Terrell, s. of Moses, m. Hannah 
Buckingham, d. of Abijah of Milford, 
June 4, 1778. [She d. Jan., 1S13; he. 
May, 1S24.] 

I. Hannah Buckingham, b. Feb. 10, 1779 [m. 
Chauncey Lewis] . 

(Lately found at Salem in Irijah Ter- 
rell's old well, a quantity of fourpenny 
cut nails not headed. The owner may 
have them on proving property and 
paying the cost and trouble. 
For particulars inquire of 

James Frisbie. 
Wat., Salem, Sept. 6, 1799. 
Rec'd to record Sept. 7, 1799-) 
Isaac Terrell, s. of Josiah, m. Sarah 
Smith, d. of Jonathan of Lime, Feb. 
25, 1762. 

I. Jane, b. July 22, 1764. 

Isaac Smith Terrell: 

Child d. June 5, 1802, a. 4.1 



Tyrrell. Terrel. 

Israel Tyrrell, s. of Josiah, m. Zeruah 

Beebe, d. of Jonathan, Feb. 9, 1758. 

1. Anah, b. Dec. 6, 1759; d. Jan. 18, 1762. 

2. Abigail, b. Oct. 23, 1760. 

3. Hannah, b. Oct. 17, 1762. 

4. Rejoice, b. Sept. 7, 1764 [m. Gibbud]. 

5. Mary, b. Nov. 15, 1766 [m. John Hall; d. a. 96]. 

6. Tirzah, b. Nov. 22, 1769; m. Martin Stevens. 

7. Joseph Goodwin, b. Jan. 5, 1773 [m. Loly Hitch- 

cock, d. of Fienjamin. 

8. Israel, b. Aug. 29, 1776.] 

Zeruah d. June 15, 17S1. and Israel m. 
Lois Upson, Jan. 15, 1783.^ 

[g. Heman, ra. Eunice Hitchcock.] 

Jared Terrell, s. of Moses, dec'd, m. Es- 
ther Eelles, d. of Lent (Lenthel on tax 
rec.) of Milford, Jan. 29, 1781. 

1. Esther, b. Dec. 12, 1781. 

2. Norris, b. July 4, 1786. 

3. Letsom, b. Dec. 29, 1790. 

Joel Terrell m. Eunice Hodge, Dec. 30, 

177S.' 
Joel Terrell m, Rosetta Morgan, ]Mch. i, 

1S32. 
Joshua Terrell, s. of Gamaliel, m. Sarah 

Merrills, d. of Nathaniel, :\Iay 4, 174S. 

I. ^Matthew, b. Mch. 21, 1748-9. 

Josiah Terrell [b. 1695; s. of John b 
1655; m. Mary Goodwin— all of Milford 
—Jan. I, 1723-4. He d. Sept. 27, 1767. 

1. Moses, b. Oct., 1724. 

2. Aaron, b. Mch., 1726. 

3. Eunice, bap. Mch., 172S. 

4. Oliver, bap. June, 1730. 

5. Josiah, bap. Nov., 1732. 

6. Isaac, bap. Feb., 1735. 

7 Israel, bap. Mch., 1737; all in Milford.] 

8. Mary, b. July 7, 1741; m. Caleb Tuttle. 

9. Abigail, b. Jan. 16, 1743-4- 

Josiah Terrell, Jr., s. of Josiah, m. Eu- 
nice Hoadley, d. of William, Dec. 22, 

1756. 

1. Toel, b. July 23, 1757. 

2. Elihue, b. Apr. 8, 1759. 

3. Margret, b. Apr. 6, 1761; m. Walter Judd. 

4. Amzi, b. June 20; d. Dec. 29, 1763. 

5. Alban, b. Nov. 20, 1764. 

Josiah Terrell [s. of Josiah] m. :Molly 
Lewis, Feb. 15, 1791. 

1. Alfred, b. Sept. 20, 1791. 

2. Rachel H., b. Dec. 25, 1792. 

3. Eunice L., b. Dec. 14, 1795. 

4. Jerusha, b. May 16, iSoi. 

5 Elizabeth F., b. July 22, 1803; m. Zalmon Mil 
lard. 

6. Polly M., h. Aug. II, 1805. 

Julia Terrell m. David Hotchkiss, 1S23, 

and Robert Scott, 1843. 
Laura Terrell m. Merritt Tompkins, 

1822. 
Loly Terrell m. R. R. Russell, 1820. 
Louisa M. Terrell m. Ralph S. Bronson, 

1S50. 
Major Terrel m. Amanda Adams, June 

19. 1S23. 



136 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERDURY. 



Terrel. Thomas. 

Marcus Terrel m. Polly Arnst, j\lch. 6, 
1S22. 

Marshal L. Terrel m. Ann J. Martin of 

Wooclbridge, Nov. 20, 1830. 

Matthew Terrel m. Mary Parker, Avig. 
28, 1769. 

1. Joshua, b. Dec. 16, 1769. 

2. (Mive, b. Nov. 5, 1773. 
f Arad, b. 1774.] 

John, bap. Apr. 26, 1778.- 

Moses Terrel, s. of Josiah, m. Susanna 
Barnes, cl. of Thomas, Sept. 3, 1745. 
[He d. Apr. i, 1783; she, Apr. 3, 1794, 
from small-pox.] 

1. Lydia, b. Jan. 10, 1746-7; m. David Eeebe. 

2. Irijah, b. "May 13, 1750. 

3. Tamason, b. Apr. 9, 1752; m. Jos. Beebe. 

4. Sarah, b. Oct. 16, 1754. 

5. Jared, b. Dec. 25, 1757. 

Myron E. Terrell of New York, s. of 
Alfred, m. Leva J. Farrell, d. of Benj., 
Apr. 21, 1844. 

I. -Alfred Elliot, b. in Naugatuck, Feb. 2, 1845. 

Oliver Terrell, s. of Josiah, m. Lidda, 
Relick of Eli Lewis of Lime, Dec. 2, 
1760. [He d. in Ohio in 1816, a. 86.] 

1. Lucindy, b. Feb. 8, 1762; m. Elisha Terrell. 

2. Icabod, b. Dec. 20, 1764 (1763?). 

Lidda d. Jan. 25, 1764, and Oliver m. 
Damaras, Rellick of Bela Lewis, May 
15, 1764. She d. Oct. 24, iSoS, a. 71.9 

Rebecca Terrell m. Henrv Chatfield, 
1836. 

Silas Tyrrell, b. Nov., 1S21, s. of John 
A., m. Anna ^Matthews, d. of Zeba, 
Mch. 26, 1843. 

1. George M., b. Sept. 19, 1844. 

2. Phebe INIaria, b. i\Ich. 15, 1S47. 

William P. Terrell d. Apr. 16, 1S45, a. 

39- 
Norman Terry of Plymouth m. Orrelia 

Painter, Sept. 4, 1842. 

Calvin Thayer, s. of Joshua of Williams- 
burgh, Mass., m. Anna Beecher, d. of 
Daniel, Apr. 12, 1S08. 

1. Mary Ann, b. Feb. g, 1809. 

2. Charles Beecher, b. Mch. 17, 1811. 
[3. Susan. 4. Antoinette.] 

Abby A. Thomas m. \). H. Monson, 
1S46. 

Berlin Thomas m. Polly H. Downs, Dec. 

6. 1837. 

Elizabeth Thomas m. Asahel Smith, 
,1829. 

Gilbert Thomas of Haddam m. Harriet 
Finch, Jan. i, 1832. 

Harriet Thomas ni. Horace Cande, 1S27. 

Henrietta Thomas m. J. M. Gray, 1S43. 



Thomas. Thompson. 

John Thomas, s. of Samuel, dec'd, m. 

Phebe ]\lallory, d. of Stephen, dec'd, of 

Stratford, Nov. 6, 1750. 

I. Bethiah, b. Au.t,'. 20, 1751. 

Phebe d. May 5, 1752 [and John m. 
iVIary Hikcox, d. of John, who d. 1765]. 

J. Zera, b. Jan. 21, 1762. 
3. Ruth, b. May 11, 1765. 

Lucy Thomas m. Stephen Welton, 1764. 

Mansfield Thomas, b. May, 1798. s. of 
Elijah of Woodbridge, m. Jan. 22, 1823, 
Sybel Piatt, b. Mch., 1797, d. of Enoch. 

1. Joseph E., b. Jan. 26, 1824. 

2. Caroline Sybel, b. Feb. i, 1828. 

3. Isaac Mansfield, b. Apr. 28, 1829. 

4. Mary Jane, b. Sept 8, 1831. 

5. Jonathan Franklin, b. June 8, 1832. 

6. Sarah Esther, b. Apr. 7, 1834. 

Mary Ann Thomas m. C. A. Warner, 

1838. 

Rhoda Thomas m. Jesse Hickcox, 17S0. 

Samuel Tommus (Thomas), s. of John of 
Woodbury, m. Rebecca Warner, d. of 
John, Apr. 8, 1725. He d. at Cape 
Britton, Jan. 2, 1745-6, and Rebecca m. 
Caleb Clark. 

1. Mabel, b. Aug. 14, 1725; m. Abr. Andruss. 

2. Rebeckah, b. May 16, 1728. 

3. John, b. Oct. 12, 1730. 

4. Tapher, b. Mch. 21, 1733. 

5. Patience, b. Apr. 23, 1735. 

6. Samuel, b. July 26, 1737; d. Aug. 17, 174c 

7. Reuben, b. Nov. 5, 1739. 

8. Samuel, b. Feb. 27, 1741-2. 

9. Bethiah, b Dec. 19, 1744; d. Feb. 25, 1749-50. 

Willis Thomas m. Abigail Roberts, Jan. 

6, 1830. 
Alonzo Thompson, s. of John, m. Jan. 

13, 1845, Jane E. Pardee, b. May 7, 

1819, d. of Roswel. 

1. Henry A., b. July 3, 1845. 

2. Gilbert Nelson, b. Mch. 19, 1847. 

Caleb Thompson, s. of William, dec'd, 
of New Haven, m. Rebeckah Hikcox, 
d. of William, Aug. 16, 1731. 

1. Sybel, b. Apr. 8, 1732. 

2. William, b. Feb. 5, 1735-6. 

3. Rachel, b. Dec. 22, 1737. 

Charlotte Thompson m. Henrv Bronson, 

1849. 
Chloe Thompson m. Jesse Fenn, 17S1. 
David Thompson from North Haven m. 

Diantha Bliss from Litchfield, May 25. 

182S. 

1. Mary Elizabeth, b. July 2, 1829; d. 1831. 

2. Mary .'Vnn. b. Feb. 26, 1831. 

3. Margaret Elizabeth, b. Feb. 23, 1833. 

Esther Thompson m. Zacchaus How, 

1772. 
Harriet Thompson m. J. S. Welton, 1838. 
John Thompson, Jr.:- 

Aliigail, bap. Apr. 11, 1783. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



Ap 137 



Thompson. Titus. 

John Thompson and Maiy: 

1. Edward, b. in Hamden, Aug. 15, 1S09. 

2. Nelson, b. Aug. 21, 1811; d. Aug. 16, 1830. 

3. Mary, b. Sept., 1813. 

4. Alonzo, b. in Hamden, Nov. 24, 1S15. 

John E. Thompson m. Mille Johnson, 

Oct. 2, 1S29. 
Mary Thompson m. David Hopkins, 

1791- 
Mary Thompson m. Wm. Langdon 

[1S2SI. 
Mary E. Thompson m. Harvey Wells, 

1834. 
Patrick Thompson m. Rosanna McAn- 

tee, May 5, 1851." 
Peter Thomson m. Bridget ]\Iedlar, Sept. 

6, 1849. 
Ruhamah Thompson m. John Smith, 

1768. 
Samuel Thompson m. Betsey Hull, Nov. 

I, 1S01.5 
William Thompson d. 1760. 

Heirs: Sybel Williams, and Rachel, vv. of Jed. 
Turner.] 

William S. Thompson from North Haven 
ni. Charlotte H. Warner, d. of Amos, 
Nov. 2, 1S34. 

1. William Henry, b. Jan. 2, 183^ 

2. Thomas James, b. Nov. 17, 1841. 

3. Frederic Homer, b. Sept. 23, 1845. 

Zachariah Thompson, s. of Hezekiah.m. 
Sarah Punderson, d. of David of New 
Haven, Nov. 26, 1771. 

1. Sarah, b. Sept. 28, 1772. 

2. Betsey, b. Feb. 14, 1774. 

3. Hezekiah, b. Dec. 2, 1776. 

4. Zachariah, b. July 10, 1779. 

Joshua Thornton of Hudinsfield, Eng., 
m. Sarah Alma Hoadley (Scovill''), June 
23, 183S. 

Eli Thrall and Lucy:^ 

Candice, b. Dec. 9, 1789. 

Elnathan Thrasher, s. of Bezalion of 
Middletown, m. Hannah Frisbie, d. of 
Elijah, Mch. 26, 1778. 

1. John, b. Mch. 19, 1779. 

2. Abigail, b. Dec. 15, 1781. 

Absolom Tinker, s. of Benjamin, m. 
Mary Eelles, d. of Lent of Milford, 
May 26, 17S0. 

1. Mary, b. Apr. 24, 1781. 

2. Sarah, b. July 26, 1782. 

3. Phineas, b. Dec. 3, 1783. 

Benjamin Tinker and Ehzabeth: 

5. Amos, b. Aug. 4. 1761. 

6. Louise, b. Mch. i, 1763. 

John Tinker m. Thenia Beebe, Mch. 24, 

1779.'' 
Wealthy Tinker m. E. S. Barnes, 1826. 
Hannah Titus m. Justus Dayton, 1777. 



Titus. Todd. 

Oliver Titus m. Eunice Westover, Dec. 

24, 1850. 
David Tobin m. Ann Rice, July 16, 183S. 
James Tobin m. Mary Ryan in Ireland, 

Jan. 25, 1838. 

1. Honora, b. in Ire., 183S. 

2. Margaret, b. in Ire., Dec. 25, 1841. 

3. Mary, b. in Ire., Aug. 15, 1843. 

4. James, b. Mch. 14, 1846. 

Ann Todd m. Marcus Scovil, 182S. 
Christopher Todd, s. of Samuel, m. Han- 
nah [Tuttle, Feb. 9, 1736-7]. 

5. Hannah, b. Nov. 6, 1746. 

Esther Todd m. Chauncey Judd, 1S29. 

Hezekiah Todd d. May 18, 1S36, a. 81. ^ 

Lucina Todd m. S. J. Holmes, 1S22. 

Luther Todd, s. of Caleb of Cheshire, m. 
Clarissa Smith, d. of John, Apr. i, 
1S29. (An earlier record says Apr. i, 
1830.) 

1. Marcia A., b. May 8, 1S30. 

2. Polly Amanda, b. Apr. 12, 1832; m. Bela Rose. 

3. Nancy A., b. Mch. 15, 1834. 

4. Esther Abigail, b. Dec. 8, 1839. 

5. Henry A., b. June 28, 1841. 

6. Charles C, b. Nov. 5, 1844. 

Mary A. Todd m. Jesse DooHttle, 1834. 

Miles Todd, b. Sept. 17, 1802, s. of Be- 
thuel, m. Apr. 30, 1830, Laura Hotch- 
kiss, b. June 1807, d. of Philo of Beth- 
any. 

1. ;\Iiles Nelson, b. May 15, 1832. 

2. Sarah Selina, b. Apr. 5, 1835. 

Noah Todd: 

Catey, bap. July 14, 1771." 

Peninah Todd ra. David Hotchkiss, 1775. 
Phebe Todd m. David Blakeslee, 1743. 
Phebe Todd m. INIartin Upson, 1822. 
Polly Ann Todd m. Timothy Porter 

[1824]. 
Russell Todd, b. June 28, 1790, s. ot 

Bethuel, m. Sally [Clark]. 

1. Bennett, b. Jan. 13, 1822. 

2. Sarah Rosaline, b. June 14, 1829; m. Edward 

Scott. 

Sally d. Dec. 25, 1833, a. 41, and Rus- 
sell ni. Nov. 22, 183S, Betsey Clark, b. 
June 29, 1789, d. of Thompson of West 
Haven. 
[Rev.] Samuel Todd [b. Oct. 27, 1709]- 
s. of Samuel of New Haven, m. Mercy 
Evans, d. of Peter of Northfield, Aug. 
31. 1739- 

I. Allathea, b. Dec. 7, 1740 [drowned in a spring, 

2 Mary, b. Sept. 11, 1742; m. Obed toot. 

3. Irena, b. Oct. 25, 1744; m. Wm Southmayd. 

4. Eliel, b. Feb. 20, 1746-7- 

5. Allathea, b. Mch. 8, 1748-9. 

6. Luce, b. Feb. 6, 1750-1. 

7. Samuel, b. Nov. 19, 1752. 



138 Ap 



BISTORT OF WATERBUBT. 



b. Aug. 7, 1756. 



Todd. Tompkins. 

9. Luce, 

and 

10. Cloe, 

Susanna Todd m. Caleb Humaston, 1738. 
Harriet Tolles m. John Downs, 1805. 
Thankful Toles m. Dan. Sanford, 1753. 
Harrison Tomlinson of Derbv m. Eme- 

rett Davis [d. of Truman], Jan. 10, 

1S41. 

Henry W. Tomlinson of New Haven m. 
Lucv Perkins [d. of EliasJ, Nov. 2, 
1845". 

Josiah S. Tomlinson m. Harriet Good- 
year, Dec. 12, 1S30. 

Mary A. Tomlinson m. Chas. Taylor, 
1S34. 

Nancy F. Tomlinson m. Wooster War- 
ner, 1S32. 

Victory Tomlinson m. Eunice Dunbar, 
Apr. 27, i7S5.-» 

Zachariah, b. July 4, 1786. 

Eunice, b. Apr. 27, 1788 [m. May 11, 180S, Rev. 
Joseph D. Walton, s. of Richard]. 

David Ball Tompkins, s. of Nathaniel, 
m. Betty Baxter, Nov. 5, 17S3. 
Nathaniel, b. Jan. J4, 1785. 

Edmund Tompkins [probably s. of Na- 
thaniel of Eastchester, N. Y., d. 1732; 
only s. of Nathaniel, d. 16S4; s. of John 
of Concord, Mass, 1640, and Fairfield, 
1644;] m. Hannah , who d. Apr. 

9, 1780. He d. June 30, 17S3, in the 
82d year of his age.* 

Edmund, m. Bethiah Wetmore. 

Else, m. Phineas Matthews, 1747, and Stephen 

Judd, 1768. 
Hannah, m. James Brown, 1744, and Gideon 

Scott, 1762. 
Jerusha, m. Ephraim Merrill, 1753. 
Susanna [b. 1734] m. Caleb Merrill, 1753. 

6. Elizabeth [b. at Woodbury, Dec. 4, 1835], d. 

Oct. 8, 1749. 

7. Nathaniel [b. at Woodbury, Mch. 22, 1738]. 

Children b. at Waterbury: 

8. Rachel, b. Jan. 23, 1740-1; m. Ben. Nichols. 

9. Mary, b. Mch. 11, 1742-3; m. Samuel Adams, 

and .^mos Prichard. 

10. Philips, b. May 6, 1748. 

Edmund Tompkins, s. of Edmund 
(above), m. Bethiah Wetmore, d. of 
Benjamin, July 10, 1754. 

1. (2.) Edmund, b. May 21, 1757 [m. Aug. 29, 1783, 

Lucinda Wildman]. 

2. (3.) Ira, b. Oct. 18, 1758. 

3. (i.) , b. Jan. 19, d. Jan. 21, 1756. 

4. Mercy, b. Feb. 24, 1760 [d. Aug. 11, 1771]. 

5. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 18, 1761. 

6. Joseph, b. Oct. 10, 1763. 

7. Philip, b. Mch. 25, 1765. 

8. Benjamin, b. Jan. 30, 1767. 

9. Frances, b. Feb. 14, 1769. 

Edmund Tompkins [s. of Ira] m. Electa 
Frost, Sept. 7, 1S28. 



Tompkins. Tompkins. 

Eleazer Tompkins, s. of Nathaniel, m. 
Hannah Hikcox, d. of William of 
Watertown, June 10, 1784. [She d. 
1822; he, 1S24, in Paris, N. Y., they 
having removed there in 1800.] 

1. Gilbert, b. Oct. 20, 1786 [m. 1813, Dorothy Stan- 

ton, and had Edward (of Oakland, Cal., who 
m. Mary E. Cooke of Bridgeport), Sarah E., 
Frederick W., and Daniel S.]. 

2. Maranda, b. June 2, 1789 [m. Uri Doolittle. 

3. Abigail, b. Dec. 14, 1794; m. Anson Hubbard. 

4. Isaac, b. June 5, 1797. 

5. Nathaniel W., b. Oct. 27, 1799.] 

George Tompkins [s. of Merrit] m. Fran- 
ces Ann Sandland, Oct. 6, 1S45. 

Harriet Tompkins m. H. C. Judd, 1S24. 

Merritt Tompkins, b. June 10, 1799, s. of 
Ira of Northfield, m. Jan. 27, 1822. 
Laura Terrell, b. May 17, 1802, d. of 
Albin. 

1. George, b. May 10, 1823. 

2. Mary, b. Feb. 10, 1825: d. June 25, 1829. 

3. Willard, b. Apr. 4, 1828. 

4. Mary Ann, b. Apr. 6, 1831; d. July 2, 1832. 

5. John, b. ]\Iay 10; d. June 2, 1833. 

6. Frederick, b. Mch. 14, 1835. 

7. P'ranklin, b. Dec. 12, 1836. 

Nathaniel Tompkins, s. of Edmund, m. 
Oct. 14, 1762, Hannah Ball [b. 1745]- 
He d. Mch. 9, 1778, and Hannah m. 
Jesse Hikcox. 

1. David Ball, B. Dec. 13, 1763. 

2. Eleazer, b. Oct. 17, 1766. 

3. Gilbert, b. Oct. 3; d. Oct. 8, 1768. 

Philip Tompkins, s. of Edmund, m. 
Mary Bull, Dec. 25, 1766. 

1. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 20; d. June 2, 1767. 

2. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 24, 1768. 

3. Hannah, b. Apr. 8, 1770. 

4. Mary, b. June 8, 1772. 

5. John, b. May i, 1774 [m. Polly Benedict]. 

6. Sarah, ) 

and >b. July 22, 1777. 

7. A dau., \ d. same day. 

8. Rusha, b. July 22, 1780. 

9. Lucy, b. May 7, 1783. 

10. Chancy, b. May 10, 1785. 

11. Daniel, b. June 27, 1787; d. July, 1790. 

Philip Tompkins m. Esther Blakeslee, 

Nov. 15, 1787. 

Sabra, b. Aug. 8, 1788. 

Solomon Tompkins m. Zuba Barnes, 

^Ich. 10, 1765. 

1. Abraham Barnes, b. Feb. 7, 1766. 

2. Martha, b. Nov. 2, 1767. 

3. Phebe, b. Mch. 15, 1770. 

4. Abigail, b. Apr. 15, 1772. 

5. Obadiah, b. June 2, 1774. 

6. Charlotte, b. Jan. 16, 1777. 

7. Samuel, b. Mch. 16, 1779. 

8. Vashti, b. Nov. 19, 1781. 

9. Edmond, b. Mch. 28, 1784. 
10. Sylvea, b. Feb. 18, 17S7. 

[Solomon Tompkins, said to have been 
born in, or near, Waterbury, Conn., 
Aug. 4, 1740, m. in 1792, at South East, 



♦ The place of Edmund's marriage is unknown, also, place and dates tof birth of the first five children. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP 139 



Tompkins. Turner. Turner. 

N. Y. , Mrs. Deborah Dan Brown, and 
had four children. He d. at Reading, 
N. Y., June 23, 1S23; she, in Mch., 
1830, a. Sg. Relationship with Solomon 
(above) has not been proven.] 

Willard Tompkins m. Mary J. Orton, 

Jan. 14, 1S49. 
Samuel Towner and Anie [Ward] : 

3. Lettice, b. July 25, 1733. 

Henry Townsend ni. Emma Abbott — 

both of Middlebury — Nov. 21, 1827. 
Thomas Townsend of New Haven ni. 

Amanda IMaria Bronson of Middlebury, 

Nov. 26, 1S35. 
Asa Train of Enireld, Mass., m. Lucia 

Leavenworth, [d. of Dr. Frederick], 

Nov. 2, 1S26. 
Frederic Treadway, b. Mch. 12, 1812, s. 

of Harvey, m. July 5, 1S36, Esther 

Johnson, b. Jan. 31, 1816, d. of Robert 

—both of Middletown. 

1. Emma Jones, b. Apr. 13, 1840. 

2. Robert Frederic, b. June 8, 1S45. 

3. [Louise] b. Apr. 25, 1847. 

Samuel P. Treat m. Hannah Terrel, 

Aug. 27, 1S42. 
Dennis Trian (Tryon ?) of Middletown ni. 

Lorana Johnson, Apr. 23, 1823. 
Esther Trowbridge m. Aaron Benedict, 

1769. 
Lydia Trowbridge m. J<ihn Woodward, 

1786.3 
Susan E. Trowbridge m. H. B. Strong, 

1840. 
[Rev.] John Trumble, s. of Jon the first 

of Suffield, was mar. to Sarah, d. of 

Mr. Samuel Whitman of Farmington, 

July 3, 1744 [and d. Dec. 13, 1787, a. 72]. 

1. Sarah, b. June 20, 1745 [m. Dr. Caleb Perkins of 

HartfordJ. 

2. A son, b. Feb. 27, 1746-7 [d. same month]. 

3. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 17, 1747-8 [d. young. 

4. John, b. Apr. 13, 1750; d. at Detroit, 1831. 

5. Lucy, m. Rev. Mr. Langdon of Danbury.] 

Lyman L. Trumbull from Milford m. 
Sarah J. Bronson, d. of Anson, Jan. 24, 
1842. 

1. Jane Sophrona, b. Feb. 14, 1844; d. 1845. 

2. Jane Grace, b. Sept. 28, 1846. 

Mrs. Charlotte Tucker, a. 28, d. Mch. 3, 

1S40.- 
Eunice Tucker m. John C. Booth, 1840. 
Deborah Tuller m. Asa Porter, 1765. 
Elizabeth Turner m. J. H. Guernsey, 

1829. 
Jediah Turner m. his second wife Rachel 

Thomson, Apr. 5, 1760. 

William, b. Apr. 6, 1761. 
Thomas, b. Dec. 6, 1762. 



TUTTLE. 

Asa, b. June 14, 1765. 
Ruth Perce, b. July 11, 1767. 
Rachel, b. Nov. 6, 1769. 
Mary, b. July 18, 1771. 

Rachel d. about the 17 of October, 1771, 
and Jediah m. his third wife, Hannah 
Webster, Apr. i, 1772. 

Jediah Thomson, b. Apr. 5, 1773. 

Jesse Turner, s. of Thomas, m. Phebe 
Humaston, d. of Caleb, Mch. 29, i774- 

1. Hille, b. Oct. 6, 1774. 

2. Caleb Humaston, b. Oct. 28, 1776. 

Mary Turner m. Thomas Andrews, 1725. 
Rachel Turner m. Joseph Gould, 1842. 
Sarah Turner m. Amos Dutton, 1769. 
Susanna Turner m. Reynolds, and 

Thomas Richards, 1723. 
Amanda Tuttle m. Selim Doolittle, 1836. 
Bostwick Tuttle m. Luania Judd, Nov. 

6, 17SS.4 

Randsley, b. Aug. 10, 1789. 

Mrs. Cornelia Tuttle d. Oct. 15, 1841, a. 

Dan Tuttle m. Abigail Frisbe [d. of Eli- 
jah], Jan. 26, 1769. 

1. Limon, b. Nov. 15, 1769. 

2. Salmon, b. Sept. lo, 1771; d. July 10, i773- 

Jabez Tuttle m. Hannah Scovill, d. of 
Lieut. John, Dec. 15, i75i- He d. Dec, 
1777 [she, in 1821, a. 87]. 

1. Jesse, b. Feb. 19, 1751. . „ . , jt Lrf^L . 

2. Hannah, b. Jan. iq, 1753 [m- Benj. PnchardJ. -eri^ T 

3. Tamer, b. Ian. 15, 1757; m- Abr. Hikcox. 

4. Sarah, b. May 19, 1759; m. David Welton. 

5. John, b. and d. Nov. 10, 1761. 

6. [Ruth] b. Jan. i, 1763 [m. Reuben Brown, and 
d. Apr., 1842]. 

7. John [Scovill], b. Sept. 20, 1766. 

8. Obadiah, b. Apr. 19, 1769. 

0. Stephen, b. Sept. 6, 1771. 

10. Mary, b. Jan. 26, 1775. , , „ „, 

11. Anna, b. Aug. 4, 1777 [m. Arad Terrell]. 

Jemima Tuttle m. Ebenezer Blakeslee, 

1731- 
Jesse Tuttle :'- 

Jimmy, bap. Mch. 25, 1781. 
Austin, bap. May 18, 1783. 

Joel Tuttle m. Lucy Calkins, Nov. 25, 
1772. 

John S. Tuttle, m. Elizabeth Judd, d. of 
Stephen, 

Josiah Tuttle, s. of Josiah of North Ha- 
ven, m. Naomi Ludington, d. of Will- 
iam, June 26, 1740. He d. Sept, 2, 
1749; and Naomi m. Gideon Allen. 

1. Eliphalet, b. May 5, 1742. 

2. William, b. Jan. 14, 1743-4. 

3. Amv, b. Alay 5, 1745. 

4. Hezekiah, b. Apr. 17, 1747. 

5. Levi, b. May 9, 1749. 

Louisa M. Tuttle m. L. P. Buell, 1851. 
Malinda Tuttle m. Harvey Cande, 1827. 



140 Ap 



BISTORT OF WATERBURY. 



TUTTLE. TWITCHELL. 

Martha Tuttle m. Nathl. Welton, 1764. 
Mary Tuttle m. John Brown, 1760. 
Melisse Tuttle m. John A. Smith, 1842. 
Noah Tuttle m. Thankful Royce, d. of 
Capt. Phineas, June 6, 1771. 

1. Andrew, b. Nov. 19, 1772. 

2. Elizabeth, b. Apr. 5, 1775. 

3. Sary, b. Mch. 3, 1777. 

4. Phineas, b. Sept. 8, 1779. 
Orrimon (?), b. Jan. 31, 1782.8 
Noah Pangman, b. July 16, 1787. 
Cloe, b. Mch. 13, 1789. 

Obed Tuttle and Lucretia: 

Lauren, Eben Clark, Leonard, and Philemon, 
bap. July 8, 1821.9 

Polly Ann Tuttle, d. of Daniel, dec'd, 
was b. Mch. 6, 1800. The above, re- 
corded at the request of Mr. David 
Hun;j,erford. 

Polly Tuttle m. Henry D. Upson, 1S38. 
Rebekah Tuttle m. Benj. Benham, 1790. 
Rebecca M. Tuttle m. Orrin B3dngton, 

1S32. 

Rebecca A. Tuttle m. David Hull, 1S3S. 
Rollin Tuttle m. Emeline Higgins — both 

of Wolcott— July iS, 1832. 
Stephen Tuttle, s. of Jabez, m. Anner 
Judd, d. of John of Watertown, Apr. 
19, 1796. 

1. Amanda, b. Mch. 30, 1797. 

2. John Nelson, b. Aug. 8, 1801 [burned to death 

in the Judd house], 

3. Pamela, b. Mch. 6, 1804. 

4. Sarah, b. Mch. 29, 1806. 

5. Mary Anner, b. Mch. 16, 1808. 

Tabitha Tuttle m. Josiah Bronson, 17S0. 
Timothy Tuttle m. Mehitable Royce, 

July 7, 1768. 

1. Amos, b. Sept. 13, 1770. 

2. Miriam, b. June 20, 1772. 

3. Truman, b. May 21, 1774. 

4. Nancy, b. May 11, 1780. 

5. Jared, b. May 15, 1782.'' 

6. Content, b. July 3, 1784. 

Vincent Tuttle, s. of Wooster, m. Mary 
Hitchcock, d. of Joash of Hartland, 
Oct. 25, 1S24. 

William Tuttle m. Taphar Castle, Aug. 

8, I7f'5- 
I. Arad, b. Apr. 30, 1766. 

Wooster Tuttle m. Mercy Baldwin, Oct. 

3, 1S02. 

1. St. Vincent, b. Jan. 15, 1804. 

2. Zophar, b. Jan. 6, 1806. 

3. Damaris L., b. Mch. 19, 1808. 



4. Julia, I 

and > b. 

5. Julius, \ 



Aug. 26, 1810; 
d. Nov., 1810. 



Fanny Twitchell m. Geo. Hoadley, 1841. 
Isaac Twitchell m. Deborah Alcox, 
Mch. 27, 1768. 

I. Joseph, b. July 15, 1769 [m. Electa Hopkins, 
and Phebe Atkins]. 



Twitchell. Upson. 

2. Mary, b. June 29, 1773 [m. John Norton]. 

3. Deborah, b. Aug. 14, 1775; m. Ebenezer Frisbie. 

Isaac d. Feb. 12, 1776, and Deborah m. 

Wait Hotchkiss. 
Alma Tyler m. Elias Porter, 1792. 
Charles Reuben Tyler from Cheshire m. 

Betsey Warner, d. of David, Oct. 2, 

1843. 

I. David, b. May 14, 1S47. 

Corydon J. Tyler from New York m. 

Lois Fowler, May 3, 1851. 
Daniel Tyler d. May 21, 1794. 
Daniel Tyler [s. of Daniel, above] m. 

Mehitable Tyler, Dec. 17, 1770. 

1. Joseph, b. Apr. 12, 1773; d. Dec. 14, 1776. 

2. 5lehitable, b. Dec. 24, 1774; d. Dec. 14, 1776. 

Mehitable d. Feb. 9, 1776, and Daniel, 
Jr., m. Mercy Osborn, July 2, 177S. 

3. Daniel, b. Mch. 23, 1779. 

4. Mehitable, b. Nov. 22, 1780. 

5. Phebe, b. Jan. 16; d. Feb. 23, 1783. 

6. Joseph, b. and d. June 3, 1785. 

7. Joseph, b. July 24, 1786; d. Sept., 1700. 

8. Eli, b. Aug. II, 1789. 

0. Phebe, b. Apr. 19, 1793. 

Ebenezer Tyler m. Anna Beebe, d. of 

Simeon, Jan. 16, 1771. 
Enos Tyler d. June 2, 1804, a. 69.' 
Esther Tyler m. Asa Hoadley, 1785. 
Eunice Tyler m. Nathl. Hoadley, 1780. 
Hannah Tyler m. Elijah Welton, 1769. 
James Tyler, s. of Daniel, m. Anne Hun- 

gerford, d. of David, Nov. 21, 1763. 

1. Rossel, b. Sept. 3, 1764. 

Lyman Tyler d. Oct. 4, 1S36, a. 70. 
Mary Tyler, wid., d. Nov. 20, 1S06, a. 

72.'' 
Phineas Tyler:' 

Rufus. and F.ldad Simons, bap. June 8, 1800. 
Lucy, liap. June 3, 1804. 

Richard Tyler m. Flora Tylor (Taylor ?) 
— both of Prospect — Apr. 18, 1830. 

Sarah Tyler m. Jesse Welton, 1770. 

Spencer Tyler, s. of Ichabod, m. Sarah 
Farrel, d. of Zebah — both of Prospect 
— Nov. 7, 1S27. 

Allen Umberfield, b. in Woodbridge, 
Mch. II, 1788, m. in 1S12, Sena San- 
ford, b. in Milford, Apr. 23, 1791. 

1. Norris, b. July 11, 1813. 

2. Willis, b. Apr. 26, 1815. 

3. William, b. Apr. 18, 1821. 

William Umberfield, s. of Allen, m. 
;\Iary Ann Morris, Feb. 8, 1842. 

I. Franklin, b. Oct. 10, 1843. 

Benjamin Upson, s. of Stephen, m. Nov. 
17, 1743, Mary Blakeslee [b. in New 
Haven, Jan. 29, 1726-7], d. of Moses. 

1. Ruel, b. June 12, 1744. 

2. Susanna, b. Jan. 22, 1745-6 fm. Ren. Gaylord], 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP141 



Upson. 



3. Lois, b. May 12, 1748; m. Israel Tyrrell. 

4. Joseph, b. May 5, 1750. 

5. Benjamin, b. July 3, 1752. 

6. Jese, b. Nov. 28, 1754; d. Mch. 28, 1755. 

7. Jesse, b. May 25, 1756 [m. Ruth Bronson]. 

8. Noah, b. Sept. 26, 1758. 
g. Ashbel, b. Apr. 25, 1762. 

10. Mary, b. June 22, 1765. 

11. Sarah, b. July 23, 1768. 

Benjamin Upson, s. of Benj., m. Mary 
Clark, relict of Thomas, Jan. 24, 1780. 
[.She d. June 13, 1816, a. 74; he, Mch. 

12. 1824, a. 72.] 

I. Stephen, b. June 12, 1783. 

Benjamin Upson m. Luanna Bunnel of 
Soiithington, June 26, 1S32. 

[Rev.] Benoni Upson, s. of Thomas, m. 
Leava Hopkins, d. of Joseph, Aug. 6, 
1778. 

Caroline Upson m. Isaac Boughton, 
1833- 

Charles Upson [s. of Thomas] m. Weal- 
thy Hopkins, May 26, 1773. She d. 
Dec. 28, 17S3. 

1. Washington, b. Sept. 2, 1775. 

2. Lee, b. May 7, 1778. 

3. Gates, b. jiily 18, 1780. 

Charles Upson, s. of Horatio, m. Emma 
Clark, d. of William, dec'd, Jan. 15, 
1823 [who d. the same year, a. 23]. 

Charles D wight Upson, s. of Samuel W., 
m. Martha A. Hotchkiss, d. of David 
of Bethany, Oct. 30, 1843. 

I. Martha Ellen, b. Nov. 12, 1844; d. Apr. 17, 1846. 

Daniel Upson [s. of Stephen, m. Mary 
Adams, d. of Samuel, Nov., 1796-] 

1. Stephen, b. May 8, 1797; d. Dec. ,6, 1822. 

2. Alvin, b. Dec. 4, 1798 

3. Daniel, b. Mch. 16, 1801. 

4. Minerva, b. Mch. 10, 1803; d. June 16, 1805. 

5. Polly ]\L-iria, b. Dec. 29, 1805; d. Jan. 10, 1807. 

6. William, b. Nov. i, 1807. 

7. Merlin, b. Feb. 28, 1810. 

8. Sarah Maria, b. Nov. 19, 1813; m. David Somers. 

9. Thomas Clark, b. Dec. 20, 1S19. 

Mary d. June 29, 1830 [and Daniel m. 
Phebe Kirtland, Sept. 4. 1831]. 

Eunice Upson m. S. M, Morris, 1831. 
Ezekiel Upson, s. of Joseph, dec'd, va. 
Mary Bronson, d. of Andrew. 

5. Ethelinda, b. Apr. 26, 17S6. 

Fidelia Upson m. Lucius Odell, 1837. 

Henry D. Upson, s. of Selah of Wolcott, 
m. Polly Tuttle, d. of Abram [Apr. 25, 
1838]. 

1. EUiott Abraham, b. Dec. 9, 1840. 

2. Emilyett, b. May 31, 1846. 

Horatio Upson:^ 

Frederic, Lucy, and George, bap. Nov. 3, 1822. 

Jesse Upson, b. May 22, 1809, s. of 
Mark, m. June 26, 1838, Esther L. 



Upson. Upson. Upson. 

Hotchkiss from Cheshire, b. Dec. 29, 
. 1816. 

1. Perry, b. May g, 1841. 

2. Cornelia, b. Feb. 17; d Mch. 2, 1S44. 

3. Burleigh, b. Sept. 13, 1846. 

John Upson, s. of Stephen, m. Elizabeth 
Judd, d. of [Deac] Thomas, July i, 

1725- 

1. Daniel, b. Mch. 19, 1726 [m. Judd]. 

2. Elijah, b. Feb. 11, 1727-8; d. Mch. 23, 1730. 

3. Elijah, b. Feb. 5, 1730-1; d. Jan., 1732-3. 

4. Hannah, b. Nov. xy\ 1733 [m. Silas Merriman]. 

5. Martha, b. May i, 1736 [m. William Barnes]. 

6. John, b. Mch. 31, 1730 [m. Lois Atwater, and d. 
1818]. 

7. James, b. Nov. 4, 1742. 

8. Elijah, b. May 6; 1745. 

Joseph Upson, s. of Stephen, m. Com- 
fort Scott, d. of Obadiah, dec'd, Feb. 
13, 1744-5, and d. Aug. 7, 1749. She d. 
Nov. 28, 1S14. 

1. Jemima, b. July 14, 1746; m. Moses Cook, Jr. 

2. Ezekiel, b. Oct. 7, 1748. 

Joseph Upson, s. of Lieut. Benjamin, m. 
Anna Bronson, d. of Thomas, dec'd, 
Feb. 3, 1771. 

Lois Upson m. William Church, 1S22. 

Lois Upson m. Anson Sperry, 1810. 

Lucena Upson m. W. Stow, 1824. 

Lucena Upson m. B. A. Linsley, 1S44. 

Martin Upson of Southington m. Phebe 
Todd, d. of Bethual, Apr. 18, 1822. 

Merlin Upson [s. of Daniel] m. Emily 
Beecher, July 5, 1836. 

Randolph F. Upson m. Naomi Man- 
chester—both of Bristol— Nov. 21, 1842. 

Reuben Upson, s. of John of Southing- 
ton, m. Hannah Richardson, d. of Na- 
thaniel, Dec. 25, 1798. 

1. Reuben, b. Aug. 28, 1799; d. May 24, 1802. 

2. Phebe Bronson, b. Oct. 13, 1801. 
Emma, Polly, and Reuben Atwater, bap. Aug. 

20, i8og.l 

Reuel Upson, s. of Benjamin, m. De- 
borah Peck, d. of Samuel, Apr. 23, 
1766. 

Esther, b. Jan. 15, 1778. ■! 
Miles, b. July 21, 1782. 
Elizabeth Peck, b. July 21, 1786. 

Samuel Upson [s. of Thomas, m. Ruth 
Cowles, Apr. 6, 1759, ace. to Southing- 
ton rec] 

1. Mary, b. Feb. 9, 1759 [m. Joseph Minor]. 

2. Archibald, b. Apr. 24, 1761; d. June i, 1782. 

3. Isaac, b. Dec. 22, 1763. 

4. Obed, b. Jan. 2, 1767; d. Jan. 22, 1S39.2 

5. Harvey, b. Nov. 11, 1769. 

6. Samuel, | 
and >b. Aug. 16, 1772. 

7. Ruth, ) 

8. Jerusha, b. June 27; d. Dec. 18, 1775. 

9. Manly, b. May 12, 1777. 
10. Betsey, b. Aug. 10, 1779. 

Samuel Wheeler Upson, b. Oct. 8, 1798, 
s. of Harvev of Wolcott, m. Mch. 28, 



142 AP 



BISTORT OF WATERS URT. 



Upson. Ubson. 

1S20, S. Maria Stevens, b. Nov. 20, 
1802, d. of Oliver. 

1. Charles Dvvight, b. Aug. 20, 1821. 

2. Albert S., b. Mch. 16, 1823. 

3. Emeline Maria, b. Dec. 5, 1824; m. Franklin 

Downs. 

4. Clark W., b. Nov. 6, 1826. 

5. M. Ashmun, b. Nov. 23, 1828. 

6. Ambrosia M., b. Nov. 29, 18^0. 

Ye account of Stephen Ubson's of Water- 
bury marriage with ye birth of his 
children given by him. 
Stephen Upson of Waterbury was mar- 
ried to maRy Lee ye daughter of John 
lee senior of farmington decem:28:i682. 

May their i born Mary was born november ye : 5 : 

(1683); in. Richard Welton. 
17 their 2 Stephen was born September ve : 30 

(1686) 
1701 their 3 Elizabeth was born Febewary ye : 14 

(1689-90); m. Thomas Bronson. 
their 4 Thomas was born March ye : i (1692) 
their 5 Hannah was bornabought march ye : 16 : 

(1695); m. Thomas Richards and John Bron- 
son. 
their 6 Tabitha was born : march : ye : 1 1 : 

(1698) m. John Scovill. 
their 7 John was born December ye : 13 (1702) 
their 8 thankfuU was born march : 14= 1706-7; 

m. James Blakeslee. 

Mary Upson, wife of the above named 
Stephen Upson died Feb. 15, 1715-16. 
[He d. 1735.] 

Stephen Upson, s. of Stephen (above), 
m. Sarah Brounson, d. of Isaak, Feb 

26, 1713. 

1. Sarah, b. Mch. 8; d. May 11. 1714. 

2. Sarah, b. July 26, 1715; m. Gideon Hikcox. 

3. Stephen, b. Dec. 9, 1717. 

4. Joseph, ) d. Aug. 5, 1749. 

and Vb. Aug. 4, 1720. 

5. Benjamin, ) 

6. Mary, b. May 2, 1724; m. Samuel Porter. 

7. Ebenezer, ) d. .-Vug. 5, 1749. 

and >b. Sept. 29, 1727. 

8. Thankful, ) m. Ebenezer Johnson. 

9. Jemima, b. Apr. 8, 1730; d. Nov. 13, 1736. 
10. Hannah, b. Sept. 28, 1735; m. Jesse Sperry. 

Sarah d. 1748, and Stephen m. Eliza- 
beth, wid. of James Prichard, Nov. 28, 
1750. He d. Sept. 10, 1777 [she, in 
1797]- 
Stephen Upson, s. of Stephen (above), m. 
Sarah Clark, d. of Thomas (2d), Jan. 
14, 1749-50. Stephen, Esq., d. Mch. 

27, 1769. [Sarah d. Sept. 29, 1813, a. 
90.] 

1. Mary, b. Nov. 21, 1750; d. Sept. 25, 1757. 

2. Olive, b. Feb. 18, 1753; m. Isaiah Prichard. 

3. Ebenezer, b. Aug. 17, 1755; d. Sept. 20, 1757. 

4. Stephen, b. Sept. 12, 1758 [shot in New York, 

1776; a Rev. soldier]. 

5. Esther, b. Sept. 21, 1760; m. Asahel Bronson. 

6. Sarah, b. July 15, 1763 [m. Stephen Gilbert]. 

7. Mark, b. Feb. 20, 1766 [m. Susanna Allen, and 

d. July, 1820]. 

8. Daniel, b. Mch. 9, 1769. 

Thomas Ubson, s. of Stephen, m. Raehill 
Judd, d. of Deac. Thomas, Jan. 28, 
1718-T9. 



Ubson. 



Waldon. 



1. Thomas, b. Dec. 20, 1719. 

2. Mary, i 

and >-b. Jan. 21, 1721. 

3. John, ) d. June 5, 1741. 

4. Josiah, b. Jan. 28, 1724-5. 

5. Asa, b. Nov. 30, 1728. 

6. Timothy, b. Oct. 8, 1731. 

7. Amoz, b. Mch. 17, 1734. 

8. Samuel, b. Mch. 8, 1737. 

9. Freeman, b. July 24, 1739; d. July 19, 1750, and 

his mother d. the same day. 

Thomas Upson, s. of Thomas of Farm- 
ington, m. Hannah Hopkins, d. of 
Capt. Timothy, dec'd, May 28, 1749. 
She d. June 6, 1757. 

1. Benoni, b. Feb. 14, 1749-50. 

2. Charles, b. Mch. i8, 1752. 

3. Silva, b. June 7, 1756; d. Sept. 5, 1764. 

Timothy Upson m. Mercy M. Holt, Dec. 

I, 1833- 
Willis Upson, s. of Freeman of South- 

ington, m. Hannah E. Wakelee, d. of 

Almus, Oct. 9, 1842. 

I. Sarah Eliza, b. Nov. 30, 1S43. 

Hannah d. Jan. iS, 1847, and Willis m. 
Julia Ann Daniels of Harwinton, Apr. 
20, 1848. 

Abraham Utter (husbandman) and Lydia: 

7. Sarah, b. July 3, 1730. 
S. Jabez, b. Nov. 7, 1733. 

Lydia; m. Thomas Welton. 

Cornelius S. Vancleef of Millstone, N. J., 
m. Sarah E. Clark, d. of Elon, May 19, 
1S45. 

Peter Vandebogart m. Electa Osborn, 
Apr. 12, 1S32. 

John Clark Vanduzer from Silver Creek, 
N. Y., b. Aug. 30, 1824, and Lucina 
Norton from Meriden, b. Sept. 4, 1826, 
m. in New Haven, Feb. 8. 1S46. 

I. Ada M., b. in Poughkeepsie, Aug. 2, 1846. 

Increase Wade:^ 

John, b. Nov. 2, 1779. 
Polly, b Mch. 2, 1782. 
Aaron, b. May 3, 1785. 

Joseph Wadsworth, b. Nov. 26, 1821, m 
in England, Sept., 1841, Kezia Newton, 
b. Ma}^ 5, 1S20. 

Charles Buttz, b. Aug. 3, 1846. 

Abigail Wait m. S. C. Fisk, 1839. 

Ebenezer Wakelin, s. of James of Strat- 
ford, m. Elizabeth Nichols, d. of Joseph, 
dec'd, Apr. 30, 1740. [He d. Jan., 1800; 
she, Aug. II, 1S02, a. 85.] 

1. Elizabeth, b. Oct. 28, 1744; m. Joseph Warner. 

2. Hannah, b. Oct. 19, 1747; d. July 23, 1749. 

3. Hannah, b. Feb. 16, 1751-2; m. Reuben trisbie. 
[David, b. 1754; d. Oct., 1822.] 

Hannah E. Wakelee m. Willis Upson, 

1842. 

Marietta Waldon m. William Moss, 1847. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP143 



Walker. Warner. 

Andre-w Walker m. Agnes McLean in 
Scotland. 

1. Jane, b. in New York, May s, 1844. 

2. John Alexander, b. July 8, 1846. 

James Walker, s. of James of Scotland, 
m. Ann McDougall, June 21, 1S43. 

1. James, b. in N. Y., July 5, 1844. 

2. Ann, b. Mch. 2. 1847. 

Redmond Walsh, b. Dec, 1S05, and 
IVIary Phelan, b. July, 1S06, m. in Ne^v 
York, Apr., 1841. 

1. Richard, b. Dec. 6, 1843. 

2. Timothy, b. July 7, 1844. 

Jane Wanza m. Isaac R. Castle, 1S32. 
Arah Ward [of Goshen, 1742; from Rip- 
ton, 1746 — and Dinah Towner?] 

Aner (Arah'), bap. Oct. 28, 1758.'' 
[Dinah, m. David Candee. 
Eunice, m. Jesse Cady.] 

[Richard Ward, s. of Abel, b. in Wood- 
bridge, Sept. 21, 17S7, m. Dec. 15, 1811, 
Roxana Hoadley, d. of Culpepper. 

1. Lewis, b. Sept. 27, 1812; m. April ig. 1835, IVIary 

Ann Curtis, and had James Burton, b. 1836. 

2. Lauren, b. L^ec. 27, 1814; m. Mch. 23, 1840, 

Emily Hotchkiss of Bethany. 

3. Maria, b. Feb. 11, 1819; m. Ralph Smith, d. of 

Philo of \Vashin.gton. 

4. Mary, b. Feb. 17, 1823; m. D. Gano Potter, and 

d. Aug. 2, 1842, leaving a dau. Mary. 

5. William, b. Mch. 7, 1825 — all b. in Salem So- 

ciety.] 

Aaron Warner, s. of David, m. Lydia 
Welton, d. of Levi, Feb. 12, 17S2. 

1. Jeremiah, b. Aug. 9, 17S2. 

2. Arad, I3. Nov. 27, 1784. 

Abijah Warner, s. of Dr. Ephraim, m. 
Rene (Irena) Warner, d. of Obadiah, 
Dec. 13, 1764. 

1. Garmon, b. Aug. 2, 1765. 

2. Lucy, b. Oct. 23, 1766. 

3. Agnes, b. Dec. 25, 1769. 

4. Rene, b. Oct. 10, 1771. 

5. Rebeckah, b. Feb. 24, 1773. 

Abraham Warner, s. of Daniel, dec'd, 
m. Keziah Welton, d. of Richard, Dec. 
12, 1734, and d. Nov. 23, 1749. 

1. Charls, b. Jan. 18, 1735-6. 

2. Levi, b. Mch. 16, 1737-8; d. Apr. 20, 1753. 

3. Zuba, b. July 12, 1740; m. Jon. Beebe. 

4. Keziah, b. Oct. 6, 1742; m. Zera Beebe. 

5. Zilpha, b. May 18, 1745. 

6. Daniel, b. Apr. 8, 1748. 

Ard Warner, s. of Dr.- Benjamin, m. 
Elizabeth Porter, d. of Dr. Dan., Jan. 
12, 1764 [and d. Apr. 30, 1S24.] 

1. Joanna, b. Sept. 3, 1764 [m. Rev. Samuel 

Gunn] . 

2. Lydia, b. Apr. 4, 1766; m. Sam. Alco.x. 

3. Ephraim, bap. May 15, 17682 [drowned, 1786]. 

4. Elizabeth, bap. Feb. 11, 1770. 

5. [Prudence, b. 1772. 

6. David, b. Jan. 11, 1774. 

7. Irena, b. 1776. 

8. Ard, b. Oct., 1778. 

9. Hannah, b. 1780; m. Anson Warner. 
10. Asahel, bap. Jan. 26, 1783.2 



Warner. Warner. 

11. Chauncey, b. 1785. 

12. Susan, b. 1789, m. Levi Warner.] 

Ard Warner, Jr., s. of Ard, m. Mary 
Bronson, d. of Seba, Aug. 29, 1804. 
She d. Apr. 22, 1846, a. 66.- 

1. Maria, | 

and -b. Oct. 28, 1805. 

2. Mary, \ m. D. B. Hurd. 

3. Elizabeth A., b. Sept. 30, 1807. 

4. Nancy, b. Nov. 15, 1809; m. John Enderton. 

5. Sherman, b. Jan. 15, 1813. 

6. Charles, b. Oct. 23, 1813. 

7. Mercia, b. Sept. 26, 1818; m. Levi Bolster. 

8. Abraham Joseph, b. July i, 1821. 

Bela Warner m. Jerusha B. Manchester 
of Dover, N. Y., Nov. 17, 1833. 

[Benjamin Warner, s. of Thomas; 
Children b. in New Haven: 

r>esire, b. Aug. 23, 1704; m. Ezekiel Sanford. 
Benjamin, b. Jan. 16, 1707. 
Joseph, b. Mch. 16, 1714. 

Benjamin Warner, Jr. (s. of above) m. 
K;iehel Sanford, Jan. i, 1729-30. Rachel 
m. Enos Sperry, Nov., 1750. 

Benjamin, b. May 2, 1730. 
Ebenezer, b. Dec. 14, 1732. 
Mary, b. Oct. 23, 1736. 
Rachel, b. Sept. 13, 1738. 
Hezekiah, b. Mch. 9, 1740-1. 
Hannah, b. July 5, 1743. 
These two entries from New Haven records.] 

Dr. Benjamin Warner, s. of Ephraim, 
m. Johanna Strorig, d. of Josiah of 
Colchester, Mch. 17, 1720. He d. Apr., 
1772, a. 75; she, Apr. 8, 1785, a. 84.] 

1. Josiah, b. Apr. 10, 1721. 

2. Dinah, b. Feb. 11, 1722-3; m. Benj. Harrison, 

Jr., and Moses Cook. 

3. Ruben, b. Oct. 13, 1725; d. Mch. 28, 1727. 

4. Margerit, b. Nov. 9, 1727; m. Oliver Welton. 

5. Ruben, b. Sept. 21, 1729. 

6. David, b. Nov. 27, 1731. 

7. Benjamin, b. Jan. 26, 1733-4. 

8. Anna, b. Jan. 31, 1735-6; m. John Hikro.x, Jr. 

9. Ephraim, b. June 25, 1738. 

10. Eunice, b. Aug. 2, 1740; m. (John Hikcox, 3d, 

ace. to Probate records and) Thomas Richa- 
son. 

11. Ard, b. Nov. 5, 1742. 

[Dr. Benjamin Warner, s. of Dr. Benja- 
min, m. Margaret Bunnell, d. of Ger- 
shom of D anbury, Aug. 4, 1755, and d. 
1758, childless.] 

Caroline E. Warner m. Isaac Way, 1850. 

Caroline Warner m. H. C. Botsford, 
1851. 

Charity Warner m. Samuel Cook, 1813. 

Charles Warner, s. of Abraham, dec'd, 
m. Martha Warner, d. of Samuel, 
dec'd, Apr. 26, 1759- 

1. Orpha, b. June 11, d. June 25, 1760. 

2. Omn (or Orrin), b. May i, 1762. 

3. Lucina, b. Apr. 12, 1764. 

4. Levi, b. Nov. 22, 1766. 

5. Asa, b. July 15, 1769. 

Charles A. Warner, s. of Ard, m. July 
I, 1838, Mary Ann Thomas, b. May 22, 



144 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURY. 



Warner. Warner. 

1S19, d. of Elisha and Asenath of 
Straitsville. 

1. Marion, b. Aug. 6, 1841. 

2. Josephine M., b. Oct. 3, 1843. 

Charlotte H. Warner m. W. S. Thomp- 
son, i>34. 

Daniel Warner, .s. of Daniel of Farming- 
ton [dec'd], m. Mary Andruss, d. of 
Abraham, in April, 1693. 

1. A son, b. and d. July, 

2. Sarah, b. Jan. 3, 1694-5. 

3. A son, b. and d. in Mch., 1695-6. 

4. Samuel, b. Sept. 16, 1698. 

5. Ebenezer, b. Apr. 11, 1706. 

6. Abraham, b. Nov. 16, 1708. 

Mary d. Apr. 10, 1709; and Daniel m. 
Johanna Richason, d. of Thomas, Apr. 

6, 1710. He d. Sept. 13, 1713, and she 
m. Isaac Castle of Woodbury. 

7. Abigail, b. Feb. 10, 1710-11 [m. Daniel Tudson]. 
S. Mary, b. July 16, 1712 [m. Isaac Tuttle, April, 

1731]- 

David Warner, s. of [Dr.] Benjamin, m. 
Abigail Harrison, d. of Benjamin, Dec. 
II, 1753- 

1. Josiah, b. Oct. 6, 1754. 

2. Aaron, b. Nov. 24, 1756. 

3. Urania, b. Oct. i, 1758; m. Justus Warner. 

4. James Harrison, b. Dec. 18, 1760. 

5. Benjamin, b. Nov. 17, 1762. 

David, bap. at the house, Feb. 19, 1771.2 
[Abigail, b. Feb. 19, 1770; m. Oliver Todd. 
Anna, b. Nov. 22, 1772; m. Chancey Warner.] 

David Warner, s. of Ard, m. Lois Sut- 
liff (wid. of Ira Tompkins) from Ply- 
mouth, Nov., 1S09. 

1. Amanda, b. Dec. 29, 1810 [m. J. T. Terry]. 

2. Vienna, b. Jan. 20, 1815. 

3. Betsey, b. Jan. 30, 1818; m. Reuben Tyler. 

David Warner m. Betsey Johnson— both 
from Humphreysville, 'July, 1S19. 

1. Sarah Maria, b. Oct. iS, 1820; d. Aug., 1840. 

2. Delia, b. July 14, 1823; d. 1824. 

3. David Dewey, b. Oct. 23, 1825; d. Jan., 1841— 

all b. in Humphreysville. 

4. Margaret Eliz., b. in New Haven, Dec. 14, 1833. 

Ebenezer Warner, s. of John, m. Mary 
Welton, d. of Richard, Jan. 22, 1728-9. 
She d. Apr. 30, 1747: he, Feb. i6J 

1749-50. 

1. Stephen, b. June 25, 1730; d. Feb. 24, 1749-50. 

2. Dorcas, b. July i, 1732; m. [ Lewis ? and] 

Amos Scott. 

3. Phebe, b. Aug. i, 1735. 

4. John, b. Mch. 10, 1739; d. Nov. 8, 1750. 

Ebenezer Warner, s. of Daniel, dec'd, 
m. Martha Scott, wid. [of Edmund] 
and d. of John Andrus, in Wat., Apr. 
18, 1734. 

1. Jemima, b. July 2, 1735. 

2. Benajah, b. Jan. 17, 1737-8; d. Dec. 17, 1741-2. 

3. Benajah, b. Jan. 8, 1741-2. 

Ebenezer Warner, s. of Ephraim, m. 
Elizabeth Brounson, d. of Thomas, 
Apr. 2, 1740. 



Warner. Warner, | 

1. Noah, b. Nov. 21, 1740; d. Apr. 6, 1759. 

2. Ebenezer, b. Sept. 17, 1742; d. Dec. 21, 1746. 

3. Margret, b. Oct. 16, 1744; m. Rich. Welton. 

4. Eben, b. Jan 16, 1747-8; d. Aug. 13, 1750. 

5. Jemima, b. Nov. 5, 1749; d. Nov. 7, 1751. 

6. Annis, b. Mch. 21, 1752'. 

7. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 17, 1754; m. Ard Welton. 

8. Justus, b. Mch. 27, 1756. 

9. Mark, b. Dec. 22, 1757. 

10. Jemimah, b. May 17, 1761. 

[Ebenezer m. his second wife, Damaris 
Finch, wid. of Dr. Ichabod Foote, who 
d. Apr. 15, 1797, a. 71. He d. Oct. 5, 

1805, a. 94.] 

Edward Warner m. Hannah Adams [d. 
of Andrew], Apr. 15, 1S24. 

Elijah Warner, s. of Deac. John, was 
mar. to Esther Fenn, d. of Thomas, by 
Mr. Andrew Stores, v. in., Nov. 19, 
1767. [He d. June, 1S34; she, 1S26.] 

1. Lyman, b. May 22, 1768 [m. Annis Welton]. 

2. Chancey, b. June 5, 1770 [ra. Anna Warner, d. 

of David, 1793]. 

3. Rosetta, b. Feb. 25, 1773 [m. Talmage. 

Elijah. Apollos,m. Chloe Wilcox of Simsbury.] 

Emma Warner m. Almon Farrel, 1826. 

Enos Warner m. Lydia Williams, Apr. 
28, 1769. 

1. Jotham, b. Apr. 22, 1770. 

2. Asa, b. Dec. 21, 1771. 

3. Lydia, b. Mch. 12, 1774. 

4. James, b. Mch. 24, 1776. 

Ephia Warner, s. of Ephraim, m. Eliza- 
beth Perkins of New Haven, Jan. 8, 
1774- 

I. Ephraim, b. July 3, 1774 [m. Tryphena Leaven- 
worth; and d. 1S15.] 

Dr. Ephraim Warner [b. 1670], s of 
John, m. Esther Richards, d. of Oba- 
diah — booth of Wat. — Aug. 16, 1692. 
He dyed in Aug., 1753, in ye S4th year 
of his age. 

Apr. I. .Margrit, b. in Feb.; d. in Mch., 1693. 
20, 2. Ephraim, b. Oct. 29, 1695; d. Dec, 1704. 
1703. 3. Benjamin, b. Sept. 30, 1698. 

4. John, b. June 24, 1700. 

5. Obadiah, b. Feb. 24, 1702-3. 
[The last two bap. in Woodbury. May 23, 1703. 

Probate records also mention Ebenezer, 
Ephraim, and Esther, w. of Nathaniel 
Merrills.] 

Ephraim Warner, s. of [Dr.] Benjamin, 
m. Lidda Brown, d. of Samuel, dec'd, 
Mch. 30, 1760. [He d. May 25, iSoS, a. 
70; she, July 20, 1815.] 

Ephraim Warner, s. of [Dr.] Ephraim 
m. Elenor Smith, d. of William of 
Farmington, Feb. 14, 1739. Dr. Eph- 
raim d. Nov. 5, 176S. 

1. William, b. Sept. 13, 1740. 

2. Abijah, b. Jan. 5, 1742-3. 

3. Rebeckah, b. June 15, 1745; m. Barnabas Scott. 

4. Epha, b. Apr. 29, 1748. 

5. Seth, b. Oct. 4, 1750; d. Oct. 23, 1751. 

6. Seth, b. Jan. 15, 1753. 

7. Elinor, b. Sept. 28, 1757; m. Jesse Tuttle. 

8. Esther, b. Mch. 30, 1760. 



I 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP145 



Warner. 



Warner. 



Ezra J. Warner from Pittsfield m. So- 
phia Morgan, d. of Walter of Amenia, 
N. Y., Nov. I, 1S40. 

1. Helen, b. July 10, 1841. 

2. Sarah Adelaide, b. i\Ich. 25, 1843. 

3. Charles Burton, b. May 25, 1845. 

Frederick A. Warner of Pittsfield m. 
Ann M. vStanley, June 14, 1846. 

Garrett P. Warner was mar. to Eunice 
Terrill by Rev. Mr. Barlow (between 
Jan. 20, and Apr. 3), 1831. 

George Warner, s. of Hermon of New- 
town, m. Julia, d. of Joseph Davis 
• Welton, Oct. 19, 1826. 

1. Cathasine E., b. July 20, 1828. 

2. Juliette S., b. Dec. 6, 1829. 

Hannah Warner m. Augustus Fox, 1S39. 

Hannah Warner m. Dan. Hubbard, 1842. 

Harriet Warner m. Thomas Stow, 1835. 

James Warner, s. of [Deac] John, m. 
Eunice Dutten, Jan. i, 1761. [She d. 
Mch. 7, 1S15, a. 76; he, May 27, 1819, 
a. 81.] 

1. Sarah, b. Oct. 12, 1761. 

2. Noah, b. Aug. 15, 1763 [d. Sept. 18, 1820]. 

3. Lucinde, b. Sept. 20, 1765; m. Elijah Hotchkiss. 

4. Eunice, b. Apr. 3; d. Aug. 30, 1769. 

5. James, b. Tan. 25, 1771; d. Jan. 15, 1773. 

6. Eunice, b."May 31, 1773 [m. Eli Terry]. 

7. James, b. Nov. i. 1775. 

Capt. James s Polly, bap. July 18, 1780.3 

Jared Warner, b. Oct. i6, 1785, s. of 
Mark, and Mary Bronson, b. May 3, 
17S5, d. of Levi, m. Aug., 1S03. 

1. Amanda, b. Nov. ig, 1804; m. Wesley Bronson. 

2. Levinus Bronson, b. Aug. 12, 180Q. 

3. Olive Caroline, b. Nov. i, 1811 [m.- James Con- 

verse] . 

4. Mary Anna, b. Dec. 8, 1828; m. C. I. Pierpont. 

[Dr.] John Warner [b. Mch. i, 1670], s. 
of John, m. Rebeckah Richason, d. of 
Thomas. Sept. 28, 1698. vShe d. Aug. 
I, 1748; he, Mch. 3, 1751. 

1. Tabitha, b. July 22, 1699 [bap. at Woodbury]. 

2. Rebeckah, b. Nov. 24, '1703 [bap. at Woodbury, 

July 9, 1704] m. Sam. Thomas, and Caleb 
Clark. 

3. Ebenezer, b. Jime 24, 1705. 

4. Lidiah, b. Feb. 23, 1706-7. 

5. John, b. [at Stratford] Mch. 31, 1717. 
Tapher, m. Isaac Castle, 1723. 
Mary; m. Ebenezer Baldwin, 1736. 
Sarah; m. Samuel Renolds, 1742. 

John Warner, s. of [Dr.] Ephraim, m. 
Esther Scott, d. of David, Dec. 17, 1724. 
Esther d. Feb. iS, 1726-7, and John m. 
Mary Hikcox, d. of Thomas, Oct. 3, 

1728. 

1. Esther, b. Sept. 11, 1729; d. Nov. 4, 1730. 

2. Phebe, b. Jan. 8, 1731-2. 

3. Annise, b. Jan. 13, 1734-5; ni. Ebenezer Curtis 

and Noah Blakeslee. 

4. James, b. Dec. 11, 1737. 

5. Mary, b. Oct. 9, 1742; d. Apr. 21, 1745. 

6. Elijah, b. Mch. 21, 1745-6. 

7. John, b. Oct. 14, 1749. 

15* 



Warner. Warner. 

[Deac] John Warner, s. of John (and 
Rebeckah), m. Sarah Bronson, d. of 
Moses, Oct. 26, 1743 [and d. Sept. 7, 
1760, a. 44]. 

1. Ellen, b. Sept. 2, 1744; d. Sept. 20, 1746. 

2. Ellen, b. Oct. 23, 1746. 

3. Bela, b. Sept. 20, 1748. 

4. Ebenezer, b. Aug. 15, 1750. 

5. John, b. Sept. 22, 1752. 
f\ Mose^, b. Dec. 22, 1756. 

John Warner, Jr. (s. of John and Es- 
ther), m. Ama Sutliff [d. of Deac. John], 
Nov. 8, I770.'' 

1. Chloe, b. May 16, 1773. 

2. Martha, b. Jan. 24, 1775. 

3. Eliel, b. Oct. 28, 1776. 

4. Aaron, b. Mch. iS, 177Q. 

5. Randal, b. Sept. 2S, 1781. 

6. Abijah, b. Feb. 10, 1784. 

7. David, b. Apr. 19, 1786. 

John Warner, 3d (s. of John and Sarah), 
m. Eunice Darrow, Jan. 24, 1779. [He 
d. 1S30, a. 79; she, 1831, a. 77.] 

1. Ellen, b. June 17, 1780.3 

2. Lydia, b. Mch. 21, 1783. 

3. Lusetta, b. June 6, 1785. 

4. Sidara, b. Apr. 23, 1787. 

5. Bela, b. June 22, 1789. 

Joseph Warner, s. of Obadiah, m. Eliza- 
beth Waklee, d. of Ebenezer, Jan. 13, 

1. Sarah, b. Nov. 6, 1763. 

2. Joseph, bap. May 12, 1765.'- 

3. Sarah, bap. Apr., 1767 [m. James H. Warner]. 

[Elizabeth d. 1767, and Joseph m. Hul- 
dah Nichols, d. of Richard, who d. 
Mch. 4, 1821, a. 75. He d. Sept. 20, 
180S, a. 73.] 

4. Obadiah, bap. Jan., 1770. 

5. Jonson, bap. June 21, 1772. 
Lydia, bap. Nov. 28, 1773. 
Luis, bap. Apr. g, 1775. 
Enos, bap. Apr. 26, 1778. 

Josiah Warner, s. of [Dr.] Benjamin of 
Stratford, m. Rebeckah Brown, d. of 
James, May 26, 1748. He d. Aug. 26, 
1750; she, Jan. 5, 1756. 

I. Ozias, b. Aug. 21, 1749. 

Josiah Warner, s. of David, m. Anna 
Prichard, d. of Roger, Jan. 6, 1774. 

1. David, b. Aug. 17, 1774. 

2. Ame, b. Sept. i, 1776. 

3. Polly, b. Oct. 5, 1779. 

4. Anna, b. June 7, 1780. 

[Thomas, and Strong, ace. to Land Rec.] 

Justus Warner and Urania [d. of David 
Warner] : 

1. Cloe, b. Sept. 20, 1780. 

2. Ruth, b. July 12, 1782. 

3. Alpheus, b. Apr. 8, 1785. 

Leonard Warner m. Caroline O. Miles 
[d. of Timon], Mch. 15, 1S37. [She d. 
Jan. 26, 1838] and Leonard m. Eliza- 
beth M., wid. of Reuben Holmes, Dec. 
2, 1S38. 
I. George Elmer Clark, b. June 15, 1841, 



146 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATEEBURY. 



Warner. Warner. 

Lydia Warner m. Stephen Judd, 1751. 
Mark Warner'' [d. Oct. 25, 1S15]: 

I'".Ii/al)eth, bap. Nov. lo, 1782. 
Nnah, liap. Sept. 5, 1784. 

Nancy Warner m. L. D. Frisbie, 1S31. 
Nancy Warner [d. of Reuben, and Lu- 

cretia Porter] m. Smith Beers, 1S34. 
Nelson Warner d. July 13, 1S46, a. 43.'^ 
Noah Warner m. Esther Hull, d. of Dr. 

Benjamin. 

Betsey, b. Apr. 5, 1787. ■* 
Lauren, b. July 17, 1789. 

Obadiah Warner, s. of Ephraim, m. 
Sarah Lewis, d. of Joseph, Feb. i, 
1726-7. 

1. Jerusha, b. Dec. 13, 1727; m. Aaron Harrison. 

2. Lydia, b. June 6, 1729; m. Thomas Welton, and 

Dr. Preserved Porter. 

3. Obadiah, b. June 20, 1731; d. June 25, 1750. 

4. Esther, b. Nov. 9, 1733; d. Feb., 1746. 

5. Joseph, b. Oct. 23, 1735. 

6. Lois, b. Mch. 30, 1738; m. Asa Scovill. 

7. Enos, b. Aug. 11, 1740; d. Sept. i, 1749. 

8. Sarah, b. Feb. 21, 1742-3; m. A. Terrill. 

9. Elloner, b. Jan. 13, 1744-5; m. Samuel Hilcco.x. 

10. Agnes, b. Feb. 24, 1747; d. Jan. 13, 1759. 

11. Irena, b. July, 1749; m. Abijah Warner, 
ij. Mary, b. Aug. 6, 1751. 

Obadiah Warner, s. of Joseph, m. Polly 
Welton, d. of Reuben, Oct. 12, 1794, 
and d. Sept. 16, 1S45, a. 76. 

1. Ransom, b. May 6, 1795. 

2. Melinda, b. Mch. i, 1707. 

3. Eri, b. Mch. i, 1799 [d. June 20, 1801]. 

4. Eri W., b. May 9, 1801. 

5. Nelson, b. Feb. 16, 1803. 

6. Reuben, b. Feb. 26, 1805. 

7. Ro.xana. b. Dec. 15, 1806; m. Burritt Judson. 

8. Richard Lewis, b. Jan. 12, 1809. 

9. Polly, b. Aug. 13, 1811; m. Isaac Newton. 

10. Bela, b. Sept. 28, 1813. 

11. Philomela, b. Apr. 21, 1816. 

12. Marietta, b. Oct. 5, 1818. 

13. Caroline, b. Nov. 27, 1821; m. i\. S. I.aiie, and 

Nathan Fenn. 

Olive Warner m. Riley Alcott, iSio. 

Ozias Warner, s. of Josiah, dec'd, m. 
Tamer Nichols, d. of Richard, Oct. 9, 
1770. 

1. Becca, b. Apr. 16, 1771. 

2. Eunice, b. in the Kings District in the County 

of Albany, Apr. 2, 1773. 

3. James, b. Oct. 18, 1774. 

4. Anson, b. Aug. 9, 1778 [d. Apr. 14, 1813]. 

5. Tamer, b. Aug. 13, 1780. 

6. Lydia, b. Mch. 14, 17S2. 

7. David, b. Feb. 20, 1784. 

8. Levi, b. Feb. 14, 1786. 

Rev. Ransom Warner m. Polly Austin 
Jan. 5, 1S23. 

Samuel Warner, s. of Thomas, vSr. , may- 
ried Sarah Scott, d. of Edmund, Sr'., 
May 12, 1715 [and died, 1741]. 

The tw'O first, sons, still-born. 

3. Mary, b. June 5, or July 5, 1718 [m. Robert 

Drakely of Woodbury, July 4, 1751]. 

4. Sarah, b. sometime in Sept., or Oct., 1720; 

Timothy Warner. 



Warner. 



Warner. 



5- Thomas, b. June 20, or June 5, 1722. 

6. Benjamin, b. Oct. 22, or Nov., 1724; d. Apr. 22, 

1760. 

7. ThankfuU, ) m. Thomas Hammond. 

and Vb. Mch. 16, 1727. 

8. Patience, ) d. before 1758, unm. 

9. Harinah, b. Aug. 20, or July, 1729; m. Abraham 

Adams. 

10. Stephen, b. Sept. 30, or Oct. 4, 1731 

11. Phebe, b. Feb. 6, 1735-6; m. Wait Wooster. 

12. Martha, b. July 21, 1738; m. Charles Warner. 
(There are two different entries; both are given.) 

Samuel Warner, s. of Daniel, dec'd, m. 
p:iizabeth Scott, d. of Edman, in Dec. 
21, 1719. 

1. Daniel, b. Aug. 27, 1720 [d. at Cape Breton]. 

2. Timothy, b. July 26, 1722. 

3. Nathan, b. July 6, 1724. 

4. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 26, 172^; m. Zebulon Scott. 
I5. Thomas; ace. to Dr. Bronson.J 

6. Nathan, b. Dec. 25, 1729. 

7. Abigail, b. Nov. 15, 1732; m. George Scott. 

8. Hulda. b. May 17, 1734; m. Thomas Warner 

and Sam. Williams. 

9. Enos, b. June 4, 1736. 

10. Susanna, b. Aug. 3, 1738; m. Ephraim Bissell 

and Abial Roberts. 

11. Samuel, b. Jan. 10, 1741-2. 

Samuel Warner, s. of Samuel (and Eliza- 
beth), m. Ame Camp, d. of Abel, May 
6, 1760. ^ 

1. Levinah, b. Sept. 16, 1761. 

2. Antha, b. Feb. 25, 1764. 

3. Bede (or Thede), b. July 5, 1766. 

4. 'Ihankful, b. July 8, 176S. 

Samuel Warner of Plymouth m. :\rary 
Maria Brown, Dec. 24, 1S32. 

Sarah Warner m. Benjamin Hikcox, 

Seth Warner, s. of Dr. Ephraim, dec'd, 
m. Irene Parker, d. of John, Dec. 25 

1772. 

I. Esther, b. July 11, 1773. 

Stephen Warner, s. of Samuel (of 
Thomas) m. Phebe Baldwin, d. of 
James of Derby, Nov. 13, i7=;4. He d. 
Nov., 1812, a. 81; she, June 22, 1824 a. 
97.5 

1. Millesent, b. Oct. 27, 1755; m. Abel Sperry [and 

Joseph Porter] . 

2. Roxana, b. Apr. 13, 1757; m. Francis Porter. 

3. Bede, b. July 6, 1761. 

4. Diana, b. Jan. 4, 1764. 

5. Anna, b. Nov. ii, 1765. 

6. Arbe, b. Apr. 13, 1768. 
[Stephen, b. 1770.] 

7.(?) Reuben, b. Oct. 11, 1773. 

Stephen Warner, Jr., s. of Stephen 
(above), m. Sarah Smith, d. of John, 
Mch., 1792. [He d. Nov., 1S25, a. 55; 
she, Mch., 1847, a. 74.] 

I. Baldwin, b. June 29, 1793 [d. in the South. 

Sally, b. Jan., 1795; m. Thomas Porter. 

Clarissa, b. 1798; m. Giles Hotchkiss. 

Reuben, d. in Canada. 
^. Minerva, b. i8oi. Garry, b. 1803. 

Mary. Benjamin. Stephen C] 

Stephen C. Warner [s. of Stephen], b. 
Nov. iS, 1815, and Letetia Combs of 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP147 



Warner. ^^ ^^'■ 

Southwick, Mass., b. Mch. 17, iSiS, m. 
in Wolcottville, Sept., 1S41. 

1. Charles Stephen, b. Jan. 19, 1S43. 

2. Mary Letetia, b. Mch. 17, 1845. 

Thomas Warner and Elizabeth; children: 

[EHzabeth, ra. Samuel Chatterton. 
Benjamin, of New Haven.] 

Those of them that were b. in Wat. : 

4 John (tailor), b. Mch. 6, 1680-1. 

5 Marv, b. Dec. o, 1682; d. June 7. 1705. 

6 Martha, b. Apr. i, 1684; m. John Andrus. 

7. Thomas, b. Oct. 28, 1687 [m. Abigail BarnesJ. 

8. Samuel, b. Mch. 16, i6qo. 

9. Margaret, b. Mch. 16, 1693; m. Ebenezer Richa 

son. 

Thomas died Nov. 24, 1714- 
Thomas Warner, s. of Samuel, dec'd 
(and Sarah), m. Huldah Warner, d. of 
Sam., Jan. 16, i753- He d. Apr. 5, 
1753, and Huldah m. Samuel Williams, 

1754- 
Thomas Warner, late from England, m. 

Mrs. Martha Arnst, July 22, 1832. 
Thomas Warner m. Susan Forrest, Oct. 

16, 1S4S. 
Timothy Warner, s. of Samuel, m. Sarah 

Warner, d. of Samuel, Feb. 25, 1745- 

1. Naomi, b. Jan. 4, 174S-6; m- Samuel Webb. 

2. Mindwell, b. Aug. 14, 1749- 

3. Rosanna, b. Aug. i, 1753. 

4. Lucy, b. Nov. 9, 1755. 

5. Jese, b. Nov. 12, 1757. 

6. Reigne, b. Nov. i, 1759. 

7. Consider, b. May 19, 1762. 

Dr;^ William Warner, s. of Dr. Ephraim, 
m. Mary Chambers, d. of Thomas, Dec. 
S, 1762. 

1. Austin, b. Dec. 18, 1764. 

2. Loretta, b. Jan. 30, 1767. 

Wooster Warner, b. July 24, 1S09, s. of 
Herman of Newtown, m. Oct. 7, 1832, 
Nancy Fenn Tomlinson, b. Oct. 17, 
181 1, d. of Beach of Plymouth. 

Mary Jane Darrow, d. of Leonard F. of New 
Haven, b. in Mch. 1834— an adopted child. 



Lyman Warren and Abigail: 

Edward, Nancy, Samuel, Delia, Emeline, Jan- 
ette, bap. Mch. 31, 1833. 1 

Asahel Watrous of Chester m. Adelia 
Fenn of Middlebury, Nov. 10, 1839. 

B Pierson Watrous m. Sarah H. Lea- 
venworth [d. of William, Jr.]— both ot 
Albany, N. Y.— Oct. 6, 1S39. 

Polly Watrous m. John Painter, 1786.=* 

William Wattles of Bethlehem m. Fran- 
ces A. Biscoe, Apr. 26, 1S40. 

Delia M. Waugh m. Luther Pierpont, 
1S14. 

Abigail Way m. Eben. Allen, 1756. 

Abigail Way m. Thomas Richason, 1756. 



Way. Webb. 

Ebenezer Way [b. about 174S] m. Lydia 
Scott [d. of Edmund], Nov. i, i774- 

Lvman, b. May 27, 1775. 

Sabra, b. 1778* [ra. Rev. Abr. BronsonJ. 

Hannah Way m. Daniel Scott, 1750. 

Isaac J. Way m. Caroline E. Warner of 
Pittstield, Aug. 12, 1850. 

[May Way, Jr., d. 1767, leaving a widow 
Rebecca and chil. Solomon, Ebenezer, 
Justus, Irene, Daniel, Anne— all 
minors. ]\Iay Way, Sr. d. about 1756-] 

Samuel Way m. Sarah Lewis, Sept. i, 
1761. 

1. Sarah, b. Oct. 20, 1762. 

2. Arad, b. Mch. 26, i763(?). 

3. Bethel, b. June 9, 1765. 

4. Samuel, b. Sept. 4, 1766. 

5. Phebe, b. June 17, 1768. 

6. James, b. May 18, 1770. 

7. Ame, b. Dec. 11, 1771. 

Samuel Way.^ 

Toel, b. July 7, 1785. 
Hester, b. Oct. 14, 178S. 

Thomas Way, s. of David, m. Zillah 
Ford, d. of Barnabas, dec'd, Feb. 18, 
1756- 

1. Tital, (son) b. Nov. 10, 1756. 

2. Elijah, b. Sept. 11, 1759. 

3. Ara, b. Feb. 22, 1761. ^ rr 

4. Elizabeth, b. Dec. 26, 1763; d. June 26, 17(16. 

5. Elizabeth, b. Aug. 6, 1766. 

6. Thaddeus, ) d. Jan. 7, 1773. 

and >-b. Oct. 6, 1768. 

7. Thomas, \ 

8. David, b. Dec. 13, 1770; d. Feb. 23, 1772. 

9. Thaddeus, b. Apr. 20, 1775. 

Daniel Webb m. Sarah Benham, Feb. 

20, 1785.^ He d. July 19, 1834. 
Jonathan Webb m. Brooks, Feb. 29, 

1776.' 
Joseph Webb from Oxford m. Caroline 

Downs, d. of John, Oct. 2(1, 1825. He 

d. Sept. 26, 1838. 

1. Harriet Ann, b. Aug. i, 1826. 

2. Hannah Eliza, b. Feb. 15, 1829. 

Margaret Webb m. Joseph Jones, 1823. 
Reuben Webb, s. of Gideon of Saybrook, 

m. Eunice Bissell, d. of Ephraim, Jan. 

2S, 1776- 

1. Reuama, b. Feb. i, 1777- 

2. Thomas, b. June 11, 1779. 

3. Reuben, b. July 28, 1781. 

4. Ephraim, b. Sept. 14, 1783. 

Samuel Webb, s. of Gideon of Saybrook, 
m. Eunice Williams, d. of Daniel, Jan. 
31, 1760. 

1. Samuel, b. Dec. 10, 1760; d. Aug. 7, 1762. 

Eunice d. Dec. 20, 1760, and Samuel 
m. Naomy Warner, d. of Timothy, Feb. 
1 8, 1762. He d. May 24, 1790, in his 
54th year. 

2. Daniel, b. Tan. 8, 1763. 

3. Aditha, b. Mch. 2, 1765. 

4. Samuel, b. May 10, 1767. 



148 Ap 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Wehb. 



Weed. Weed 



5. Reuben, b. Jan. 8, 1770. 

6. Jonah, b. May 16, 1772. 

7. Nathan, b. Feb. 2, 1775. 

8. Benoni, b. Dec. 2, 1777. 

9. Lucy, b. Mch. 5, 1782. 

10. Asa, b. Jan. iS, 1785. 

11. A dau., b. and d. July 31, 17S7. 

Annie Webster m. Jos. Nichols, 1757. 

Elias W. Webster m. ]\Ielissa Allen, 
Sept. 2, 1S44. 

Hannah Webster m. Jediah Turner, 
1772. 

Lucy Webster m. Preston Hall, 1S39. 

Rhoda Webster m. Hobert Williams, 
1S41. 

Sarah J. Webster m. G. W. Mitchell, 

1H9. 
Susanna Webster m. David Ailing, 1S39. 

William W. Webster m. Mary A. See- 
ley of Bethany, Apr. 19, 1S51. 

Chauncey Wedg m. Mrs. Polly Salina 
Terrell, Apr. i, 1833. 

Martin C. Wedge, b. Mch. 23, iSio, s. of 
Stephen of Warren, m. Chloe U. Far- 
rell, d. of Benjamin, Aug. 14, 1S31. 

1. Henry C, b. July 7, 1832. 

2. Augusta U., b. Jan. 7, 1S35. 

3. Stephen B., b. Oct. 22, 1838. 

4. Beecher M., b. Apr. 28, 1842. 

5. Polly Leve, b. May 27, 1847. 

[Andrew Weed d. 175S. 

His heirs were his brothers: Samuel, John, Jo- 
seph, Jonas, Caleb, George; and the ch. of 
his sisters Mary Beach, and Joanna Osborn, 
and all were ch. of John of Derby.] 

Caleb Weed, s. of John, dee'd [and Mary 
Beeman, d. of Geo.] of Derby, m. 
Martha Peck, d. of ]\Ir. Jeremiah, July 
7, 1742. 

1. Mary, b. Nov. 22, 1743. 

2. Jesse, b. Apr. 24, 1746. 

3. Elijah, b. Mch. 21, 1748. 

4. Grace, b. Mch. 5, 1749-50. 

5. Lois, b. June 26, 1752. 

6. John, b. July 3, 1754. 

7. Jeremiah, b. Dec. 30, 1756. 

8. Caleb, b. July 29, 1759. 

9. Lydia, b. Mch. 7, 1762. 
10. Mary, b. Sept. 8, 1766. 

Jesse Weed [s. of Caleb] and Anna Rice 
(Royce?), b. Nov. 30, 1753, m. Apr. 4, 
1777.3 

1. Silas, b. Mch. 4, 1778. 

2. Lois, b, Dec. 25, 1779. 

3. Martha, b. Apr. 3, 1782. 

4. Rhoda, b. Mch. 9, 1784. 
V Rice, b. Aug. i, 1786. 

John Weed, s. of John of Derby, m. 
Allice Clark, d. of Daniel of New 
Haven, Sept. 11, 1735. 

1. Elizabeth, b. Dec. 11, 1736. 

2. Mary, b. Oct. 27, 1738; m. Ebenezer Scott. 

3. Esther, b. Nov. 11, 1740. 

4. Eunice, b. Sept. 12, 1742. 

5. Hannah, b. Nov. 18, 1744; m. Abr. Hotchkiss. 



Welton. 

Jonas Weed, s. of John of Derby, m. 
Elizabeth Stevens, d. of Samuel of 
West Haven, Sept. 12, 1734. 

Phebe. bap. Apr. 5, 1747. c 

Joseph Weed, s. of John of Derby, m. 
Deljorah ]\Ioses, d. of John of Syms- 
bury, June 5, 1740. 

1. Isaac, b. Mch. 22; d. May iS, 1741. 

2. Aaron, b. May 28, 1742. 

3. Moses, b. Jan. 5, 1745-6. 

4. L)orcas, b. Mch. 19, 1747-S. 

Sarah Weed d. Feb. 15, 1747-S. [She was 
d. of John Richason, and wife of 
Samuel Weed, "who lately resided 
under covert at Waterbury, being an 
outlaw," ace. to Probate rec. Children: 

Samuel, d. 1750, unmarried. David, dead in 
1750. Nathaniel. Dan. Reuben. John of 
Little Britain, N. Y. Abel.] 

Thankful Weed m. James Curtis, 1779. 
Rev. Holland Weeks m. Harriot Byron 

Hopkins, d. of Moses, Esq., of Great 

Barrington, Dec. 10, 1799. 

1. Anna Holland, b. Oct. iS, iSoo. 

2. Harriot Hopkins, 1 

and Vb. Jan. 2, 1802. 

3. Hannah Mosely, ) 

4. Samuel, b. Mch. 3, iSos. 

Charlotte M. Wells m. Samuel Nichols, 
1851. 

Harvey Wells of New Haven m. Mary 

E. Thompson, Nov. 3, 1S34. 

Aaron Welton [s of Eliakim] m. Zerah 
Bronson [d. of Capt. Amos], Jan. 13, 
1777- 

1. Tamer, b. Feb. 28, 1778. 

2. A son, b. Dec. 7, 1779; d. Jan. 5, 1780. 

3. Harvey, b. Oct. 28, 1780; d. Feb. 7, 1782. 

4. Harvey Bronson, b. Nov. 2, 1782. 

5. Junius, b. July 7, 1784. ^ 

6. Leve, b. June 4, 1786. 

Amasa Welton, s. of Stephen, m. Mary 
Nichols, d. of Benjamin, Sept. 6, 1770. 

1. Achsah, b. May ao, 1773. 

2. Orpha, b. June 9, 1776. 

3. Mary Jane, b. June 12, 1779.3 

4. Chandler, b. Dec. 25, 1781. 

5. Sarah, b. Jan. 11, 1784. 

[Arad W. Welton, s. of Benjamin, m. 
Sally Smith of Northfield. 

Ellen, b. Apr. 17, 1817; m. Charles Wooster. 
Oliver, b. Aug. 24, 1820; d. Jan., 1842. I 
Andrew b. Aug. 27, 1823; d.'Dec, 1841. \ 

Students at Trinity College. 
Noah B., b. Mch. 21, 1829.] 

Ard Welton, s. of Oliver, m. Elizabeth 
Warner, d. of Ebenezer, Sept. 13, 1773, 
and d. July 19, 1S03. [She d. Apr.,' 

1827.] 

1. Annis, b. Sept. 13, 1774 [m. Lyman Warner, and 

d. 1844]. 

2. Erastus, b. Aug. 6, 1776. 

3. Margatana, b. Feb. 25, 1779; m. Lemuel Porter. 

4. Isaac, b. Oct. 21, 1785 [d. a't Yale, Feb. 14, 1S06, 

of scarlet fever]. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP149 



Welton. Welton. 

Ard Welton [s. of Erastus] m. Caroline 

Welton [d. of Richard F.], Jan. 25, 

1826. 

[1. Margaret A., b. Jan. 4, 1827. 
2. Ellen S., b. Oct. 18, 1829.] 

Benjamin Welton [s. of Oliver] ni. Agnes 
Gunn, Aug. 5, 1779. [He d. Aug. 31, 
1S36, a. S2; she, Feb. 3, 1S27, a. 67.] 

1. Anne, b. May lo, 1780. 

2. Willard, b. Jan. 14, 1782. 

3. Abel Gunn, b. Feb. 15, 1785. 

4. Benjamin Smith, b. Mch. 5, 1791. 

5. Arad Warren, b. May i, 1794. 

Charles Welton m. Sally M. Judd, Jlay 

I, 1S34. 
Chauncey P. Welton of Wolcott [s. of 

Hershel] m. Janett Cleveland of Har- 

winton, Nov. S, 1S47. 
Dan Welton, s. of George, m. Ann Brus- 

ter, d. of Samuel of Lebanon, Apr. 16, 

1755. [She d. May 17, 1790, a. 58.] 

1. Hannah, b. May 12, 1757. 

2. Gaal, b. July 15, 1759. 

3. Martha, b. May 4, 1762. 

4. Ann Bruster, b. Apr. 22, 1764. 

5. Tabitha, b. Aug. 14, 1766. 

6. Rachel, b. Oct. 14, 1769. 

7. James, b. July i, 1772. 

David Welton, s. of Ebenezer, m. Sarah 
Tuttle, d. of Jabez, June 20, 1781. He 
d. July 3, 1827, a. 75. 

1. Daniel, b. Nov. 19, 1781 [m. Susanna Selkrig] 

and d. May 26, 1824. 

2. Jabez, b. May 30, 1783. 

3. David, b. June 27, 1785 [d. Mch. S, 1812]. 

4. Hannah, b. Sept. 18, 1789. 

David Welton, s. of Jabez, m. Huldah 
Bronson, d. of Joseph of Prospect, 
Sept. 16, 1833. 

1. Frances E., b. Sept. 2, 1837. 

2. Maria P. (i.r Marion), b. May 8, 1843. 

Delia A. Welton [d. of Jared] m. Daniel 
B. Clark, 1S34. 

Ebenezer Welton [s. of John] and 
Sarah, m. Mercy Earl, Junr., of East 
Hampton, L. I., May 22, 1740. 

1. Nathaniel, b. Apr. 4, o. s., 1741. 

2. Sarah, b. Dec. 5, o. s., 1743. 

3. Mercy, b. Sept. 15, o. s., 1746; m. Ezek. Welton. 

4. Ebenezer, b. July 14, o. s., i74[9]. 

5. David, b. July 27, 175 [2]. 

6. Phebe, b. Apr. 11, 1755; d. Sept. 16, 1777. 

7. Daniel, b. June 5, 1760; d. Apr. 22, 1777. 

Edward Welton [s. of Richard] m. 
Laura W. Brown of Reedsborough, 
Vt., Apr. 10, 1825. 

Eli Welton, s. of Eliakim, m. Ann Bald- 
win, d. of Ebenezer, July i, 1771. He 
d. Jan. 2, 1792, a. 46.^ 

1. Eli, b. Aug. 10, 1772. 

2. Asa, b. Nov. 24, 1773. 

3. Phebe, b. Sept. 29, 177s; d. Sept. 16, 1777. 

4. Eunice, b. Aug. 12, 1777 [m. J. H. Waters]. 

5. Benoni, b. Apr. ig, 1780. 

6. Anna, b. Nov. 7, 1781.8 

7. Ruthe, b. iVIch. 6, 1785. 

8. Selden, b. May 31, 1787. 

9. Phebe, b. Nov. 6, 1788. 



Welton. Welton. 

Eliakim Welton, s. of Richard, m. Eu- 
nice Bronson, d. of Mo.ses, Apr "8 
173O. 

1. Eliakim, b. Sept. 22, 1736. 

2. Eunice, b. Oct. 19, 1738 [m. David Roberts! . 

3. Ay,s, b Aug 13, 1740 [m. Thaddeus Barnes]. 

4. Richard, b. Oct. 10, 1743. 

5. Eli, b. Oct. 10, 1746. 

6. Moses, b. June 25, 1749. 

7. Aaron, b. Feb. 19, 1752. 

8. Benony, 1 [d. unm.] 

and Vb. Feb. iS, 1756. 

9. Benjamin, ) [d. a few days old.] 

Eliakim Welton, Jr., s. of Eliakim, m. 
Amy Baldwin, d. of Ebenezer, Oct. 5, 
1763. [He d. June 8, 1821.J 

1. Eben, b. June 24, 1764. 

2. Eliakim, b. Jan. 13, 1767. 

3. Ame, b. Sept. 24; d. Oct. 11, 1769. 

4. Joseph, b. Sept. 6, 1770; d. May 7, 177. 

5. Mark, b. Apr. 27, 1773. 

6. Arae, b. Apr. 4, 1776. 

7. Avis, b. Apr. 12; d. Apr. 30, 1770. 

8. Joseph, b. Mch. 20, 1780. 

9. Moses b Mch. 16; 1783 [m. Huldah Hotchkiss, 

and d. Sept. 17, 1829]. 

10. Micai, b. Mch. 9, 1787; d. Feb. 4, 178S. 

Eliakim Welton, Junr, s. of Eliakim 
(above), m. Loly Barnes, d. of Titus 
Jan. 31, 1788. 

1. Orrasena, b. Mch. 10, 1790 [m. Thomas Wor- 

den]. 

2. Micah Baldwin, b. Aug. 13, 1792 [m. Wealthy 

Upson]. 

3. Sherman Peck, b. Oct. 24, 1796; d. Oct. 20, 1797. 

4. Sherman Peck, b. Oct. 8, 1798 [m. Ruth Up- 

son] . 

5. Sally, b. July 7, 1801. 

Elijah Welton, s. of Stephen, m. Hannah 
Tyler, d. of Isaac of Wallingford, Feb 

23, 1769- 

1. Daniel Miles, b. Aug. 24, 1770. 

2. Isaac, b. Jan. 11, 1775. 

3. Hannah, b. Jan. 30, 1778. 

Ephraim Welton [s. of Richard F., m. 
Polly Nichols, d. of Lemuel] who d. 
Feb. 3, 1843, a. 50.'^ Children: 

Sarah Ann, m. W. P. Hoadley, 1831. 
Ephraim, d. Mch. 17, 1848, a. 22.2 
[John. George. Henry. William.] 

Erastus Welton, s. of Ard, and Abigail 
Church from Derby, b. May 17, 1776 
m. Jan. 12, 1797. She d. Feb., 1846, a.' 
69. [He d. Aug., 1849.] 

1. Polly, b. July 24, 1797; m. J. S. Hall. 

2. Shelden, b. Nov. 7, 1709. 

3. Ard, b. Feb. 24, 1805. 

4. Isaac, b. Aug. 25, 1806. 

5. Elizabeth, b. Mch. 17, 1809; m. Joseph Hine. 

Ezekiel Welton, s. of Thomas, Jr., m. 
Mercy Welton, d. of Ebenezer, Oct 2^' 

1765. ■ 

1. Eri, b. Feb. S, 176S. 

2. Cephas, b. Apr. 25, 1771. 

3. Gracina, b. Mch. 7, 1774. 

Frederick A. Welton [s. of Horace] m 
Harriet M. Boyden [d. of David] Tan 
I, 1851. 



150AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Welton. Welton. 

The record of the children of George 
Welton, s. of John, sen'', and Eliza- 
beth [Mallory of Stratford, m. Dec. lo, 
1712]. He d. Jan. 7; she, Dec. 20, 1773. 

1. Stephen, b. Oct. 27, 1713 (probably in Strat- 

ford). 

2. Samuel, b. Oct. 20, 1715; d. June 16, 1738. 

3. Peater, b. Sept. 28, 1718. 

4. Elizabeth, b. May 23, 1721; ra. Samuel Hikco.x. 

5. Hannah, b. June 11, 1723; m. Samuel Frost. 

6. James, b. Oct. 9, 1725. 

7. Josiah, b. June 10, 172S. 

S. Dan (Daniel, on tax records), b. May 19, 1731. 

George H. Welton, b. Apr. 21, 1822, s. 
of Ephraim, m. Marj' T. Nichols, d. of 
Joseph, Jan. 28, 1844. 

1. Sarah, b. Oct. 29, 1844. 

2. Ella Maria, b. Alay i, 1846. 

George S. Welton, b. Apr. 4, 1804, s. of 
Daniel, and gr. s. of David, m. Aug. 
29, 1835, Fila C. Smith, b. Sept. 3, 1810, 
d. of Marshall. 

1. Sarah Lucina, b. May lo, 1837. 

2. George Marshall, b. July 15, 1S39. 

George W. Welton [b. Aug. 26, 1809, s. 
of Richard F. of John] m. Harriet 
Minor [d. of Archibald] of Wolcott, 
Sept. II, 1837. 

[i. Harriet Minor, b. May ii, 1839.] 

Harriet d. May 26, 1839, a. 27' [and 
George m. Dec. 22, 1840, at Berlin, 
Mary A. Graham. 

2. Mary Elizabeth, b. Sept. 13, 1841. 

3. Emily J., b. Aug. 27, 1845. 

4. Ellen Caroline, b. Sept. 7, 1851]. 

Hannah A. Welton [d. of Herschel] m. 

E. L. Frisbie, 1S50. 
Hobart [Victory] Welton, s. of Rev. 

Joseph D., m. Mary Adeline Richards 

[d. of Luther Abijah] from Vermont, 

Oct. 28, 1834. 

1. Edwin Davis, b. Apr. 4, 1836. 

2. Sarah Cornelia, b. Sept. 10, 1839. 

Horace Clark Welton, b. Feb. 15, 1801, 
s. of Adrian and gr. s. of John, Esq., 
m. June 29, 1823, Sophia Bradley, b. 
Apr. I, 1804, d. of Daniel of Plymouth 
Bay. 

1. William Alonzo, b. Dec. 20, 1824. 

2. Frederic Alonzo, b. Apr. 8, 1827. 

Horace P. Welton, s. of Nathaniel, m. 
Julia Ann Finch, d. of Asahel, Nov. 23, 
1823. 

1. Edwin Austin, b. June 27, 1824. 

2. Augustus Peck, b. Mch. 16, 1826. 

3. James Horace, b. Mch. 16, 1829. 

Julia d. May i, 1830, and Horace m. 
Susan Amelia Hitchcock, d. of Samuel 
of Prospect, Nov. 13, 1831. 

4. Julia Amelia, b. Dec. 23, 1832. 

5. David Frederic, b. Sept. 26, 1834. 

6. Stella Maria, b. Mch. g, 1838. 

7. Nelson Clark, b. Nov. 17, 1840. 

8. Mary Eliza, b. Dec. 15, 1843. 

9. William Nathaniel, b. Apr., d. June, 1846. 



Weltox. Welton. 

Irena Welton m. J. M. Granniss, 1S3S. 
Jabez Welton, s. of David, m. Betsey 

Moore of New Haven [and d. Sept. 28, 

1S50]. 

1. Ebenezer, b. Nov. 22, 1805. 

2. [Rebecca], b. Jan. 27, 1809; m. Tyler Bronson 

and Lucius Beach. 

3. David, b. Aug. 26, 1812. 

4. Polly [b. Aug. 6, 1813] m. Cornelius Munson. 
[5. Deac. Francis, b. Jan. 26, 1817.] 

James Welton, s. of George, m. Mary 
Prichard, wid. of Joseph, late of Mil- 
ford, Dec. 26, 1763. She d. Nov. 17, 
1807; and he. May 19, 1S12. 

Jared Welton's wife [Philomela Norton] 
d. May 12, 1843, a. 88. 

Jennet Welton m. Eric Scott, 1831. 

Jerusha Welton m. Benjamin Pitcher, 

1777- 
Jesse Welton, s. of Stephen, m. Sarah 

Tyler, d. of Isaac of Wallingford, Dec. 

13, 1770. 

1. Parthena, b. July 4, 1772. 

2. Abigail, b. Mch. 5, 1774. 

3. Enos, b. Sept. 29, 1776. 
Jesse, b. Mch. 16, 1782.3 
Sarah, b. Aug. 27, 1784. 

The Record of the children of John and 
Mary Welton Se'' of ye: Children that 
were born In Waterbury: 

Their seventh child a son Richard born some- 
tiiite in Ularch, 1680. 
9. Hannah, b. Apr. i, 1683 [m. Thomas Squires, 

Jr.] 
10. Thomas, b. Feb. 4, 1684-5. 

ir. George, b. Feb. 3, 1686-7 [was bound out to his 
brother Stephen to learn the weaver's trade]. 

12. Else, b. sometime in Aug., 1690 [m. Griffin 

of Simsbury. Was she " Else Jones of Wat." 
in 1742 ? 

Children born (at Farmington ?) 

1. Abigail, m. Cornelius Bronson, 1691. 

2. Mary, m. John Richards, 1692. 

3. Elizabeth, m. Thomas Griffin of Simsbury; was 

a widow in 1726, and d. 1733. 

4. John. 5. Stephen. The sixth and eighth, 

probably died young.] 

John d. June 18, 1726; his wife, Oct. 18, 
1716. 
John Welton, s. of John, m. Sarah Buck, 
d. of Ezekiel, Jr., of Wethersfield, Mch. 

13, 1706. She d. Sept. 6, 1751 [he, in 
173S]. 

1. John, b. Jan. 24, 1706-7. 

2. Ezekeill, b. Mch. 4, 1709 [went to Nova Sco- 

tia]. 

3. George, b. Aug. 16, 1711. 

4. Ebenezer, b. Aug. 31, 1713. 

5. Mary, b. Jan. 26, 1716; d. Jan. 5, 1718-19. 

6. Thomas, b. Feb. 23, 1718. 

^7. Mary, b. Oct. 10,, 1720; m. Samuel Earls. 

8. Rachel, b. Dec. 10, 1722; m. Abel Camp. 

9. Oliver, b. Dec. 14, 1724. 
TO. Silence, b. Dec. 24, 1727. 

John Welton, s. of John (above), m. 
Elizabeth Hendrick of Fairfield, Feb. 
12, 1738-9. She d. Dec. 20, 1773; he, 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



AP151 



Welton. Welton. 

Jan. 6, 1780. [The town took his 
estate, Feb., 1755, and, by evidence, 
cared for him until his death.] 

1. Lois, b. May g, 1744 [m. Jacobs.] 

2. Luff, b. Mch. Q, 1747-8; d. Aug. 11, 1749. 

John Welton [Esq.], s. of Richard (and 
Anna), m. Dorcas Hikcox, d. of Capt. 
Samuel, Jan. 5, 1758 [who d. June 13, 
1S15; he d. Jan. 22, 1816]. 

1. Abi, b. Nov. 2, 1758; d. May 14, 1S2S. 

2. A dau., still born. 

3. Mary, b. June 10, 1760 [ra. Hez. Phelps, and 

d. Sept. 6, i8n]. 

4. Anne, b. Feb. 11, 1762 [d. May 10, 1803]. 

5. Titus, b. July 3, 1764. 

6. Richard Fenton, b. Apr. 17, 1767. 

7. John, b. Oct. 28, 1769; d. Dec. i, 1776. 

8. Dorcas, b. Oct. 29, 1771; d. July 23, 1793. 

0. Adrian, b. Feb. 15, 1775 [d. Oct. 26, 1804]. 
10. John, b. Jan. 13, 1778 [d. Apr. 2, 1813]. 

John S. Welton m. Harriet Thompson of 

Norfolk, Sept. 3, 1S3S. 
Joseph Welton, b. May 15, 1S14, s. of 

Rev. Joseph Davis and Eunice m. Mary 

Salina, d. of Seabury and Clorana Pier- 

pont, Jan. 20, 1S36. 

1. Homer Heber, b. Feb. 22, 1S37. 

2. Eunice Clorana, b. Oct. 7, 1839. 

3. Lucy Adeline, b. Nov. 14, 1841. 

Joseph C. Welton [s. of Richard F.] m. 
Jane E. Porter, June 28, 1839. 

[i. Caroline Josephine, b. June 7, 1S42.] 

Josiah Welton, s. of George, m. Martha 
Keley (Kelsey?) d. of Jonathan of 
Woodbury, Dec. 28, 17^2. He d. Jan. 
5. 175S. 

Julia Welton m. Vinson Gunn, 1812. 

Julia Welton, d. of Rev. J. D., m. George 
Warner, 1S26. 

Levi Welton, s. of Stephen, dec'd, m. 
Mary Seymur, d. of Richard, June 3, 
1761. 

1. Deborah, b. Mch. 28, 1762. 

2. Lydia, b. Oct. 28, 1763; ra. Aaron Warner. 

3. Stephen, b. Oct. i, 1765 [m. Sus. Bronson ?J 

]\lary, w. of Levi, d. Feb. 7, 1768 [and 
Levi m. Molly Hall]. 

4. Mali (Molly) Seymour, bap. Mch. 25, 1770^ [m. 

Jesse Silkrigg of Wolcott], 

5. Hannah, bap. July 28, 1771 [m. Hez. Welton]. 

6. Rosanna, bap. Oct. 6, 1776 (b. July 3) [m. 

Michael Harrison]. 

7. Lavinia, bap. Apr. 5, 1778; m. James Brown. 

Lucinda Welton m. Neh. Hubbell, i774.'* 

Lydia A. Welton m. Anson Lane, 1828. 

Lyman Welton, s. of Thomas, and 

Minerva Judd, b. June 29, 1800, d. of 

Benjamin of Watertown, m. Dec. 24, 

1822. 

1. Henry Augustus, b. Dec. 2, 1823. 

2. Lyraan Franklin, b. Dec. 11, 1827. 

^,. James Nelson (Nelson J.), b. Feb. 15, 1829. 

Mary Welton, d. of Adrian, m. R. L. 
Judd, 1826. 



Welton. Welton. 

Merrit W. Welton of Watertown m. 

Chloe [Clarissa, d. of Elias] Prichard, 

Sept. 25, 1833. 

Nathaniel Welton, s. of Ebenezer, m. 
Martha Tuttle, d. of Thomas of New 
Haven, Feb. 16, 1764, and d. Apr. 23, 

1777- 

1. Sarah, b. Mch. 10, 1765 (was the second child 

christened at St. James's Church). 

2. Hezekiah, b. Nov. 30, 1766. 

3. Uri, b. June 30, 1768. 

4. Nathaniel, b. Mch. 10, 1770; d. Aug., 1840. 

5. Jarvis, b. Feb. 26, 1772. 

6. Allyn, b. Mch. 11, 1774. 

7. Elias, b. July iS, 1776. 

Oliver Welton, s. of John, dec'd, m. ]Mar- 
garet Warner, d. of Benj., Dec. 14, 
1749. He d. Nov. 9, 1809, a. 84. She 
d. Jan. 27, 1823, a. 96.] 

1. Anne, b. May 7, 1751; d. Aug., 1753. 

2. Ard, b. Aug. 19, 1752. 

3. Benjamin, b. Sept. 27, 1754. 

4. Arad, b. Feb. 26, 1758. 

5. Margretana, b. Oct. 27, 1763. 

Peter Welton, s. of George, m. Abigail 
Porter, d. of Nathl. in the North Pur- 
chase in Woodbury, Nov. 22, 1739, and 
d. June 20, 1790, a. 72. 

1. Samuel, b. Sept. 26; d. Oct. 8, 1740. 

2. Ruth, b. Sept. 26, 1741. 

3. Peter, b. Feb. 23, 1743-4. 

4. Job, b. Mch. 15, 1745-6; d. at Ticonderoga, Oct. 

II, 1776. 

5. Abigail, b. Aug. 4, 1748; d. Sept. 22, 1751. 

6. George, b. Aug. 22, 1750; d. Oct. 20, 1751. 

7. Abigail, b. Oct. 27, 1753; m. Andrew Bostwick. 

8. Elizabeth, b. May 18, 1756; m. David Dayton. 

9. Dinah, b. June i, 1759; m. David Punderson ? 

10. George, b. Nov. 12, 1761 [m. Oct. 24, 1780, 

Elizabeth Ann Botsford of Bridgewater. He 
was a Revolutionary soldier, and d. May 21, 
1837]. 

11. Mary, b. May 15, 1765; m. Michael Judd. 

Peter Welton, Jr., s. of Peter, m. Desire 
Cooper [d. of Caleb of New Haven, 
and Desire Sanford], Apr. 10, 1766. 

1. Desire, b. Dec. 15, 1766. 

2. Luciania, b. July i, 1769. 

3. Sarah, b. May 19, 1771. 

4. Peter, b. Dec. 19, 1773. 

5. Josiah, b. Aug. 6, 1776. 

Polly Welton, d. of Reuben, m. Obad. 
Warner, 1794. 

Richard Welton, s. of John, m. Mary 
Upson, d. of Stephen, Nov. 5, 1701 
[and d. 1755]- 

1. Richard, b. Jan. 5, 1701. 

2. John, b. July 13, 1703. 

3. Stephen, b. Mch. 12, 1706. 

4. Mary, b. June i, 1708; m. Ebenezer Warner. 

5. Thomas, b. Oct. 25, 1710. 

6. Kezia, b. Dec. i, 1713; m. Abraham Warner. 

7. Eliakim, b. June 21, 1715. 

8. Tabitha, b. Feb. 17, 1720-ig [m. Edward Neal]. 
ii. Ede, b. Apr. 24, 1729 [m. Lewis, d. a. 21]. 

Richard Welton, s. of Richard (above), 
m. Anna Fenton, d. of Jonathan of 



153 AP 



HISTORY OF WATERBURT. 



Wl'.I.TON. WeLTON. 

Fairfield, Nov. 3, 1724. She d. Dec. 
17, 1765; and he, Jan. 11, 1766. 

1. Anna, b. Aug. 17, 1725; m. John Brown. 

2. John, b. Jan. 6, 1726-7. 

3. Abi, b. Oct. 29, 172Q. 

4. Titus, b. Oct. 20, 1732; d. July 9, 1757. 

5. Abi, b. Oct. s, 1738; m. Thomas Fenn. 

Richard Walton, s. of Eliakim, m. Mar- 
gret Warner, d. of Ebenezer, Apr. 27, 
1766. 

1. Noah, b. Feb. 15, 1767. 

2. Richard Warner, b. Oct. 10; d. Dec. 14, 176S. 

Margaret d. Oct. 19, 1768, and Richard 
m. Hannah Davis, Arag. 7, 1770 (1769?). 
[He d. Feb. 26, 1820; she, Dec. 11, 1S3S, 
a. 94.] 

Their first child Thomas b. (probably an 

error). 
Richard, bap. June 17, 1770.- 
[Margaret, b. July 2, 1772] m. Dan. Steele. 
Thomas, bap. Jan. 5, 1775. 

Hannah, bap. Dec. 9, 1777 [m. David WarnerJ . 
Joseph Davis, bap. June i, 17S3. 

Richard Welton, Jr., s. of Richard 
(above), m. Sarah Gunn, d. of Nathl., 
Mch. 19, 1797 [and d. Sept. 26, 1S07, a. 
3S]. 

I. Artemesia, b. Apr. 15, 179S; m. Lauren Frisbie. 
[2. Edward, b. Jan. 19, 1800. 

3. Merrit, b. Apr. 5, 1802. 

4. Amy, b. Apr. 18, 1804. 

5. Hannah Maria, b. July 10, 1807.] 

Richard F. Welton m. Nancy Horton, 
Apr. S, 1830. 

Samuel Welton [s. of Stephen] m. Jeru- 
sha Hill, Nov. 23, 1769, and d. May 9, 

1777- 

1. Annah, b. Dec. 23, 1770. 

2. Jonathan, b. Feb. 14, 1774. 

3. Lydia, b. Oct. iS, 1776. 

Sarah Welton [d. of Dan.] m. D. P. 
Bunce, 1S33. 

Seymour H. Welton, b. Oct. 13, 1S22, s. 
of Bela, and Elizabeth :Merriam, b. 
Dec. 5, 1S25, d. of Edward S. of Water- 
town, m. Dec. 18, 1844. 

I. Bela S., b. Jan. 7, 1846. 

[Shelden Welton, s. of Erastus, m. Bet- 
sey Jordan, Sept. 12, 1S25. 

1. Adeline E., b. Nov. 11, 1826. 

2. Birdsey S., b. Aug. 17, 1831. 

3. Hiram E., b. Oct. 14, 1S34.] 

Stephen Welton, s. of John, m. Mary 
Gaylord, d. of Joseph, Mch. 4, 1701-2. 

I Abigail, b. Nov. 14, 1701-2; m. Gershom Ful- 

ford. 
2. Mary, b. Dec. 10, 1704; m. Thomas Porter. 
3! Unis, b. Apr. 19, 1707 [m. Caleb Lewis of Wal- 

lingford, Jan. 10, 1736]. 

4. Sarah, b. July 14, 1709. 

Mary d. July 18, 1709, and Stephen m. 
Jan. 28, 1712-13, Johannah Westover 
of Simsbury. He d. Mch. 13, 1713. 



Welton. Welton. 

Stephen Welton, s. of Richard, m. De- 
borah Sutliff, d. of John, Dec. 13, 1731, 
and d. Apr. 30, 1759. 

1. INLirtha, b. Nov. 19, 1732; d. Dec. 20, 1736. 

2. Levy (Levi), b. Nov. 10, 1734; d. Dec. 27, 1736. 

3. Martha, b. Mch. i, 1736-7; m. Jehulah (jrilley. 

4. Dinah, b. May 22, 1738; m. Jas. Doolittle. 

5. Levy, b. Mch. 6, 1741-2. 

6. Stephen, b. Jan. 7, 1744-5. 

7. Thomas, b. Dec. 22, 1749; d. Aug. 7, 1751. 
S. Thomas, b. Nov. 22, 1751. 

Stephen Welton, s. of George, m. Abi- 
gail Baldwin, d. of Jonathan, Avig. 27, 
1741. She d. Nov. i, 1776. 

1. Elijah, b. Aug. 13, 1742. 

2. Samuel, b. Nov. 2, 1744. 

3. Jesse, b. Nov. 23, 1746. 

4. Amasa, b. Apr. 26, 1749. 

5. Daniel, b. Apr. i, 1752; d. Nov. 17, 1753. 

6. Achsah, b. Sept. 15, 1754. 

7. Josiah, b. Feb. 17, 1759. 

Stephen Welton (above?) m. ^vid. Ann 
Hotchkiss, Mch. 3, 1779. 

Stephen Welton, s. of Stephen, dec'd, 
(and Deborah), ni, Lucy Thomas, May 
2, 1764. 

1. Lemuel, b. Nov. 24, 1766. 

2. Dinah, b. June 25, 1770. 

3. Levi, b. Oct. 9, 1772. 

4. Lucy, b. Mch. 19, 1774. 

5. Zilphe, b. Jan. 25, 1776. 

6. Elihu, b. (3ct. 31, 1779. 

Thomas Welton, s. of John, Senr., m. 
Hannah Allford, d. of Josiah, Mch. 9, 
1714 and d. Apr. 19, 1717. 

I. Thomas, b. Dec. 15, 1714 [d. young]. 

Thomas Welton, s. of John (and Sarah), 
m. Mary Cosset, d. of Ranny of Syms- 
bury, Sept. 15, 1742. [He d. May 12, 
1S03.] 

1. Ezekiel, b. Aug. 29, 1743. 

2. Ruben, b. Feb. 19, 1745-6. 

3. Ailing, b. July 14, 1748; d. July 31, 1749. 

4. Allyn, b. May 16; d. June 28, 1750. 

5. Bethel, b. Aug. 9, 1751; d. Jan. 5, 1763. 

6. Lucretia, b. Jan. 20, 1754. 

7. Roserty, b. Feb. 10; d. Mch. 2, 1757. 

8. Levina, b. Apr. 20, 1759. 

9. Shubill, b. July 29, 1761. 
10. Bethel, b. July 18, 1767. 

Thomas Welton, s. of Richard, m. Lydia 
Utter, d. of Abr., Feb. 21, 1739-40. 
She d. Aug. 21, 1750, and Thomas m. 
May 28, 1751, Lydia Warner, d. of 
Obadiah. [He adopted his nephew, 
Richard, and d. Dec. i, 1780. Lydia 
ni. Dr. Preserved Porter.] 

Thomas Welton, the third [s. of Ste- 
phen], ni. Abigail Hikcox, d. of Lieut. 
William, Jan. 22, 1772. 

1. Seymer, b. July 2, 1772. 

2. Sarah, b. Dec. 28, 1773; d. Jan. 19, 1774. 

3. Jared, b. July 15, 1774. 

4. Elias, b. July 18, 1776. 

5. Sarah, b. Dec. 12, 1778. 

6. Chloe, b. Nov. 2, 1780. 

7. Lydia, b. July 21, 1783. 

8. Fanna, b. Apr. i, 1785. 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



Apl53 



Vb. lur 



Welton. Wheeler. 

9. Lorra, b. Feb. 15, 1787. 

10. Ransom, b. July iS, 1789. 

Abigail d. Jan. 13, 1791, and Thomas 
m. Ruth, wid. (of Ziba) Norton, Sept. 
26, 1792. She d. July 6, 1793; he, Apr. 
24, 1835, a. " 

11. Thomas Hikcox, 
and Vb. June 24, 170^. 

12. Ruth Hopkins, \ ' [m. Stre'et Todd]. 

Thomas Welton, b. Dec. 8, 1774, s. of 
Richard, and Sybel Cook from Wal- 
lingford, b. Oct. iS, 1778, m. Jan. 3, 
1797- 

1. Lyman, b. June 15, 1798. 

2. Evelina, b. Jan. 23, 1800; m. Anson Downs. 

3. Minerva, b. Mch. 19, 1802. 

4. Sally Desire, b. Sept. 5, 1807; d. Mch., 180S. 
5 Sally Desire, b. June 14, iSio. 

6. Nancy, b. Apr. 12, 1812. 

William A. Welton [s. of Horace C] 
m. Eliza Prichard, d. of Leonard, Nov. 
16, 1847. 

Eunice Westover m. Oliver Titus, 1S50. 

Johannah Westover m. Stephen Welton, 
1712. 

Rachel Westover m. Jer. Kilborn, 1S44. 

Anne Wetmore m. Seth Blake, 1769.^ 

Benjamin Wetmore : ^Nlarcy, wife of 
Benj. [d. of Sam. Roberts], d. May 2, 
1757, and he m. Apr. 4, 1758, Frances 
[d. of John Boam], wid. of Richard 
Anthony of Middletown. [He d. May, 
1770; she, April, 1776.] 

Bethiah Wetmore m. Edmund Tomp- 
kins, 1754. 

Josiah Whetmore [b. 1721, s. of Benja- 
min and Mercy Roberts] and ileliit- 
able: 

4. Benjamin, b. July 23: d. Sept. 7, 1753. 

[Mehitable was b. July 28, 1721. d. of 
James Leavenworth and Hester Trow- 
bridge of Stratford, and was niece of 
Rev. Mark Leavenworth.] vShe d. 
1S07, a. 86. 
Timothy Wetmore and Martha [Eggles- 
tone, m. in Middletown, Nov. 2, 1768. 

Timothy Clark, and James, b. in Mid.] 

3. Polle, b. Feb. 7, 1774. 

4. Constant, b. Apr. 4, 1780. 

Ana Wheeler m. Edmund Austin, 1795. 

David Wheeler from Oxford m. Mary 
Ann Pritchard, d. of Eliphalet, Aug., 
1807. 

1. Daniel, b. Mch. 10, 1S08. 

2. Rosetta, b. Nov. 12, 1S12 [m. Thorp]. 

3. Mary Ann, b. May 2, 1818; d. Jan., 1845. 

4. Harriet Jane, b. Aug. 2, 1820. 

David d. Mch. 3, 1S22 [a. 43], and Mary 
Ann m. Jesse Brown. 
Joseph Wheeler of Watertown m. Sarah 
A. Leavenworth, Oct. 26, 1834. 

16* 



Whe..u,f.r. Wilkinson. 

Mary Whealer m. Benjamin Scott, 1771. 

Mary Wheeler m. Stephen Judd, 1748. 

Reuben M. Wheeler m. Rcbeckah Chat- 
field, Jan. 27, 1S28. 

Ruth Wheeler m. John Richason, 1701. 

Ruth Wheeler m. Daniel Woostcr, 1792. 

Sarah Wheeler m. Nathl. Gunn, 172S. 

Ambrose S. White, s. of John, m. Nancy 

Wocister, d. of Elijah of Middlebury, 

Mch., 1832. 

1. Maria, b. July 30, 1832. 

2. Ann, b. Jan. 24, 1835. 

3. Samuel, b. Jidy 16, 1840. 

Hiram J. White m. Henrietta S. Clark, 
Aug. 14, 182S. 

Janette White m. L. P. Bryan, 1836. 

John White, b. Aug. 19, 1777, s. of 
Samuel of New Haven, m. Eunice Os- 
born, d. of Abram, Nov. 29, 1798. 

1. Andrew, b. Apr. 18, 1800. 

2. Abram, b. Dec. 18, 1802. 

3. Seymour, b. Aujj. 31, 1805. 

4. Ambrose S., b. Aug. 15, 1811. 

5. Sally, b. May 15, 1814. 

6. Rebecca, b. Dec. 15, 1816. 

John White m. Mary O'Niele, Sept. 7 
1849. 

Thomas White m. Nora Galvin in Ire- 
land. 

1. Catharine, b. in Wat., Oct. 28, 1843. 

2. John, b. June 13, 1845. 

3. Margarett, b. June 13, 1846. 

Betsey Whitlock m. A. P. Henesey, 

1836. 
Sarah Whitman m. Rev. John Trumble, 

1744- 
Jane Wiat m. Moses Bronson, 1712. 
Mary J. Wilcox m. William Bassford, 

I '^45. 
William Wilcox was m. to Bede Scott 

b\' Rev. Mr. Alexander Gillett, Jan. 20, 

1780. 
Joanna Wilkinson m. Otis Burnham, 

1825. 
Joel Wilkinson m. in Wat., Caroline 

Cook of Torringford, Dec. 11, 1836. 
Larned Wilkinson, b. Jan. 31, 1798, s. 

of Jonathan of Sunderland [Mass.], m. 

Louisa Bill, b. Aug. 10, 1807, in Tyring- 

ham, Mass. 

1. Elizabeth L., b. in Winchester, Aug. 10, 1833. 

Louisa d. Aug. 13, 1834, and Larned 
m. Mary M. Bill, June 22, 1836. She was 
b. in Tyringham, Apr. i, 1816. They 
moved to Waterbui-y, Mch. 28, 1837. 

2. Mary B., b. Feb. 13, 1839; d. Sept., 1840. 

3. Larned, b. Dec. 8, 1840; d. Feb. 20, 1841. 

4. Mary D., b. Feb. 14, 1842. 

5. Franklin L., b. July 31, 1844. 



154 Ap 



mSTORT OF WATERBURY. 



l^'"'^"^^^^- Williams. 

Phebe Wilkinson m. R. C. Xichols 1S45 

Thankful Willard m. Elisha Hikcox 
1764. 

[Bartholomew Williams d. 1759- wid 
vSybel (Thompson); children: 
Israel. Rebecca. Bartholomew.] 

Benjamin Williams, s. of Thomas dec'd 
m. barah Painter, d. of John, Apr S 
1762. ^ ■ ' 

1. Isabel, b. Dec. 21, lyfi- 

2. Debr.rab, b. June 5, 1766. 

3. Sarah, b. Oct. 29, 1768. 

Charles Williams m. Polly McDonald— 
both of Columbia— Jan. 3, 1S02 * 

Daniel Williams [b. 1710], s. of James, 
deed, ot Wallingford, m. Mary Lewis 
cl of Joseph, May 9, 1732, and d. July 
1^-1754. [She m. Obadiah Munsonl 
and d. 1S02. ^ 

I. Susanna, b Feb 14, 1732-3; d. Aug. 24, 1749. 
Anna b. May 26, 1735; m. Isaac Jucld! 

3. Dan, b. Nov. 22, 1737. 

4. Unice b. Sept. 3, 174^; m. Samuel Webb. 

5. Zuba, b. Dec. 25, 1744 [m. Abner Lewis]. 

^Walll'ni].^'' ''''-' ^'"- J^'^^P'^ '^>"-- "f 
7. Ruben, b. Mch. 25, 1754. 

Dann Williams, s. of Daniel (above), 
dec d, m. .Mary Prindle, d. of Nathan, 
dec d, Dec. 12, 1755. 

1. Phebe b. Nov. 23, 1756; d. July 7, 1758. 

2. Anne, b. Oct. 10, 1759; d. May 3, 1762. 

Daniel Williams m. Patience Weed 

•Nov., 17S2.'' ' 

Ro.\ana, b. An.;;. 19, 1789.3 

Eliza Williams m. Alexander Hme, 1S49. 
Hannah Williams 111. Georp:e Prichard 

Ji--. i7''7. 
Hannah Williams m. Henry Book, 1789. 
Hiram Williams of Bristol m. Lydia M 

Frost [d. of AlpheusJ, Nov. 7, 1S42. 
Hobert Williams, s. of Horace, m. Rhoda 

C. \V ebster, d. of Ozias of Harwinton 

June 7, 1 84 1. 

1. Horace Ozias, b. July 26, 1842 

2. Hannah Eliza, b. June 20, 1844. 

James Williams [b. Sept. 14, 1692, s of 
James of Hartford, who d. in Walling:- 
ford, 1725, and Sarah Richa.son, m 
Sarah Judd, d. of Thomas, Jr Dec' 
29. 1715- 

Abigail, and two boys both named James, tl. in 

Martha, m. William Andrew.s. 
Mary, probably m. Thomas Coles 
Sarah. Timothy, b. 1724.] 

10. Abigail, b. Feb. 20, 1729-30. 

11. Lois, b. Feb. 20, 1731-2. 

12. Ruth, b. Oct. Q, 1734. 

13. Hepsibah, b. feb. 23, 1736-7; m. John Fenn. 

James d. Oct. 13, 1740 [and in 175 1 
Sarah was called Sarah Wood or 



Weed]. 



^^'"-^■'-"'s- Williams. 

James Williams [s of Thomas ? m. Lydia 
Smith of Wallingford, 1743]. 

4- Jotham, b. Apr. 20, 1750. 

{St'c (7 /so Thomas.) 

James Williams [s. of Timothy of Tamesl 
m. Sarah Boardman, Apr. i, 1776. 

1. Eunice, b. Nov. ig, 1776 

2. Jonathan, b. July '28, 1778. 
[3. Mary, b. 1780. 

Sarah d. Aug. 27, 1780, and James m 
Hannah Chilson, 17S7.] 

Lewis Williams [s. of Reuben] m. Pollv 
Porter, June 14, iSoi.s 

Lydia Williams m. Enos Warner, 1769. 

Obed Williams m. Elizabeth Doolittle 
Dec. 10, 1776.-^ 

1. Obed, b. Sept. 26, 1777. 

2. Sally, b. Sept. 3, 1770 

3. Becca, J 
and U). Jan. 20, 1781. 

4. Betsey, ) 
5- Chauncey, b. Apr. 23, 17S2. 

6. Isaac, b. May 23, 1783. 

7. Polly, b. Aug. 30, 1784'. 

8. Billy, b. June 28, 1786. 

9. Clarry, b. Sept. 6, 1788. 

Rebeckah Williams m. Thomas JIurfee, 
1783.' 

Reuben Williams, s. of Daniel, m. Anna 
Hotchkiss, d. of Capt. Gideon, xMch. 16 

1775- 

1. Huldah, b. Apr. 10, 1776. 

2. Lewis, b. Oct. 30, 1780. 

3. Reuben, b. May 24, 17S8. 

Rosanah Williams m. David Hun-er- 
lord, 1760. 

Samuel Williams, s. of Samuel of Wal- 
hngtord jxvho was b. June, 1700, and 
Hannah Hikcox. m. Nov. 13, 1722] m 
Lois Scott, d. of Samuel of Edmund' 
Alay 2S, 1752. 

1. Samuel, b. Sept. g; d. Dec. 31, 175,. 

Lois d Sept. 23, 1753, and Samuel m. 
Huldah, widow of Thomas Warner 
Aug. 27, 1754. 

2. Lois, b. May 24, 1755. 

3. Zebah, b. May g, 1757 

5. Lli/abeth, b. Mch. 21, 1762 

6. Lucy, b. Apr. 26, 1764. 

I' ^UU^t^^f^^"- '7' '767; m.Ichabod Terrell? 

b. bibbel, b. Oct. 2, 1769. 

9. Samuel Warner, b. May n 177, 

10. Hannah, b. Nov. 15, 1775. ' 

Sarah Williams m. Asahel Hotchkiss, 
17S1. 

Susanna Williams m. John Hotchkiss 
1790. 

Thomas Williams dyed Septem 29, A D 

1749. in his 49 year. His dau. Catte'rn' 

m her 19th yr, d. Aug. 14, 1749. His 

son Reuben, in his 15th year, d. Nov 

29, 1749- Isabel, wife of the above- 



FAMILY RECORDS. 



•M- 155 



Williams. Wilmot. 

named Thomas, in her 53d yr. d. Apr. 
25, 1751- Jotham, .s. of James Will- 
iams d. Sept. 6, 1749. 

[His heirs were wid. Isabell; chil. James (of New 
Haven, 1751), Thomas, Benjamin and Obedi- 
ence, w. of Nathan Brownson. Walling-ford rec. 
give James, b. 1721, Hannah, 1723, and Obe- 
dience, b. 1732, to Tliomas and Isabel.] 

Thomas Williams, s. of Thomas, dec'd, 
m. Jerusha Broitnson, d. of ]\Ioses, Jan. 
31, 1749-50. 

1. Reuben, b. Nov, 24, 1750. 

2. Rachel, b. Nov 27, 1752. 

3. Rosin, b. Feb. 21, 1755. 

4. Catern, b. Sept. 5, 1757. 

5. Hannah, b. Nov. 8, 1759. 

6. Thomas, b. Apr. 21, 1762. 

7. Daniel, b. Oct. 10, 1764; d. May 17, 176S. 

8. John, b. Mch. 2S, 1767. 

9. Mary, b. July 4, 1769; d. i\Iay 30, 1783. 

Timothy Williams, s. 6i James, dec'd, 
m. Eunice [L3'dia] Foot, d. of Jona- 
than, Mch. 22, 1750. She d. Dec. 5, 
1776 [he, 1803]. 

1. Jonathan, b. Sept. 13, 1751 [d. 1776]. 

2. Jerusha, b. Nov. 27, 1753 [m. Boardman 

and d. June, 1782]. 

3. James, b. Sept. 23, 1755. 

4. Daniel, b. Apr. 27, 1759. 

5. Timothy, b. Jan. 8; d. Jan. 16, 1763. 
[6. Timothy, b. May 13, 1765.] 

6.(?) Lydia, b. Apr. 16, 1769 [d. June, 1795.] 

Timothy Williams, Jr., s. of Timothy, 
m. Susa Maria Hill, d. of Jared, Nov. 
I, 1792. 

1. Jerusha, b. Aug. 3, 1793; m. Alpheus Frost. 

2. Lydia, b. Apr. 10, 1795; ™- Mark Warner. 

3. Horace, b. in Plymouth, Dec. 28, 1796 [m. Sa- 

lina Scott, d. of Joel]. 

4. Jere Hill, b. Sept. 2, 1803. 

5. Anson, b. Aug. 28, 1807 [m. Marietta Keeler]. 

Widow Williams d. Oct. 13, 180S, a. 78.' 

Abigail Wilmot m. Thaddeus Bronson, 

1772. 
Abijah Wilmot, s. of Benjamin, m. Ruth 

Hikcox, d. of Ambrose, Aug. 5, 1763. 

1. Mary, b. Aug. 28, 1764. 

2. Silas, b. June 17, 1766. 

3. Abijah, b. Mch. 20, 1768. 

4. Electa, b. Jan. 3, 1770. 

Ruth d. Feb. 26, 1771, and Abijah m. 
Tapher Castle [d. of Isaac], July 9, 
1771. 

5. Fraderick, b. May 25, 1772. 

6. Benjamin, b. Apr. 16, 1774. 

7. Ruth, b. Sept. 30, 1776. 

8. Ebenezer, b. Dec. 25, 1780. 

Amos Wilmot d. June 6, 1S09, a. 53.^ 
Amy Wilmot m. Bennet Pritchard, 1S25. 
Benjamin Wilmot d. June 25, 1768. Abi- 
gail, his wife, d. Dec. 30, 1771. 

Benjamin, his son, d. Dec. 28, 1770. 

Elijah Wilmot's wife d. Dec. 29, iSii, a. 

7I-' 
Eunice Wilmot m. Isaac Hine, 1768. 



Wilmot. Woodruff. 

Jesse Wilmot: 

Stephen BunnL-11 and Loly, bap. Jan. 18, 1801. 9 

Mary E. Wilmot m. Spencer Prichard, 
1829. 

Metra Wilmot d. May 6, 1S09, a. 22. * 

Wid. Sarah Wilmot d. Jan. 24, 1804, a. 

89.' 
Elizabeth Wilson m. Richard Fox, 1S42. 
James Smith Wilson of Danbury m. 

Mary Loundsbury, Nov. 14, 1840. 
Hannah Winters m. Timothy Porter, 

Mary Winters m. Joseph Nichols, 1772. 

Obadiah Winteis m. Phebe Gordan, Apr. 

25, 176S. 

I. James Gorden, bap. Jan. 29, 1769.2 

Henry B. Wolf m. I\Iary Ann Cummings, 

June 9, 1S50. 
David Wood from Somers' [lawyer]. 

Alonzo David, bap. June 5, 1814. 
Ruth [Allen? I and her dan., Rebecca, wife of 
Az. Woohvorth, bap. Aug. 4, 1816. 

Rev. Luke Wood and Anna [Pease]; 

Maria, m. R. S. Hazen, 1821. 
Ursula, m. William Russell, 1821. 

Children b. in Wat. : 

Luke Edward, b. Sept. 5, iSog. 
Sereno, b. Sept. 16, 1811 [d. 1815]. 
Cornelius, b. June 13, 1814 [d. 1815]. 
Cornelia, bap. Apr. 28, 1S17.I 
Juliette, bap. Dec. 2, 1819. 

Edmund Woodford m. JNIartha Clemens, 
Oct. 25, 1847. 

Aner F. Woodin, b. Feb. 14, 1816, s. of 
John of Oxford, m. Aug. 11, 1S39, 
Maria F. Beach, d. of James of Litch- 
field. 

1. Maria Antoinette, b. May 24, 1840. 

Maria d. Feb. 11, 1842, and Aner m. 
Delight Bronson, d. of Joseph of Pros- 
pect, Sept. II, 1842. 

2. Parmelia, b. Aug. 15, 1S44. 

3. Eliza Jane, b. June 14, 1S46. 

George W. Woodin of Oxford ni. Julia 

Neal, Nov. 27, 1845. 
Enoch Woodruff m. Ruth Andrews of 

Oxford, Aug. 13, 1S37. 
Franklin J. Woodruff m. Elizabeth ]\Ior- 

ris, Oct. 31, 1S42. 
Hannah Woodruff m. Israel Richason, 

1697. 
Isaac Woodruff and Sarah:^ 

Sarah Newton, b. May 27, 1768 [m. Os- 

born ?] . 
Susanna, b. Jan. 24, 1770. 
Comfort, b. Dec. 27, 1771; d. Jan. 14, 1784. 
Isaac, b. Oct. 10, 1773. 
Clark, b. Apr. 30, 1776. 
Joseph, b. Mch. 8, 1778. 
Merrit, b. June 17, 1780, 



156 AP 



UISTOltT OF WATERS URT. 



Woodruff. Woodward. 

Mary, b. Nov. 15, 178J. 

Luke, a negro servant of Jsaac, h. Jan. 31, 1784. 

Isaac d. Mch. 31, 17S2, a. 36. 
John L. Woodruff of Watertown in. El- 

mira Downs of Wolcott, June 6, 1S32. 
Jonah Woodruff m. Mabel Adams, d. of 

Al)rahan:. July 30, 1777.^ 
Marietta Woodruff m. E. E. Smith, 1841. 
Mary Woodruff, wid. of Miles J., d. Oct. 

6, 1S40, a. 25.- 

Samuel Woodruff [s. of John] and Jemi- 
ma: 

Hannah, b. May 20, 1783. 
Enoch (., b. Jan. 15, 1786. 

Ensine Abel Woodward, b. Apr. i, 1736, 
old stile, s. of Capt. Israel, m. Lucy 
Atward [b. May 4, 1735], d. of Jonathan 
of Woodbury, Mch. 21, 1765. 

1. [Dr.] Reuben Sherman, b. Ian. o, 1766-5 hn 

Rachel Prindle, d of David]. ' 

2. Eunice, b. Mch. 18, 1767. 

3. Lucy, b. Mch. 13, 1769; d. Jan. 14, 177,,. 

4. Abel, b. Oct. 13, 1770; m. Susanna Woodruff of 

O.xford, Oct. 20, 1793.9 

5. James, b. Sept. 25, 1772. 

6. David, b. Oct. 26," 1774. 

7. Lucy, b. July 23, 1776. 

8. John, b. Aug. 12, 1778. 

9. Jerusha, b. Apr. 2, 1781. 
10. Russell, b. Jan. 10, 1783. 

Antipas Woodward m. Annis Flinn 
Nov. 6, 1788.-* 

I. Warren, b. Sept. 8, 1789. 

Israel Woodward [b. June 5, 1707; d. 
Aug. 17, 1799, a. 92; s. of John, Jr!, of 
Lebanon, bap. 1674; s. of John of 
Northampton; s. of Henry of Dorches- 
ter, Mass., 1636; m. Abigail Beard of 
Huntington, and came to Waterbury 
about 1749, with his six sons]. 

10. Samuel, b. Oct. 25, 1750. 

[An Indian woman belonging to Israel 
d. July II, 1774.] 

Israel Woodward [b. 1740], s. of Israel 
m. Abigail vStoddard, d. of Eliakim' 
Oct. 28, 1765." 

1. Sarah Bard, b. Dec. 4, 1767. 

2. Pamelia, b. Apr. 15, 1770. 
3- Abigail, b. May 19, 1772. 
4. Anna, b. Dec. 4, 1774. 

5- Asa, b. Aug. 24, 1779. 

John Woodward m. Lydia Trowbridee 

J"iy 13. 17S6.3 *= ' 

1. William, b. May 3, 17S7. 

2. Rebecca, b. Jan. 9, 1789. 

Nathan Woodward, s. of Israel m 

Sarah Hikco.x, d. of Thomas, Tune b 

1757- 

I. A dau., b. June 3, d. June 25, 175S. 

^' m;''"-m , •• ^\'759; d. June n, 1760. 
3- Moses Hawknis, b. Mch. 31, 1761 

4. Antipas, b. June 24, 1763 

5. Sarah, b. Sept. 17, 1765 

6. Lois, b. May 18, 1768. 



Woodward. Wooster. 

Sarah d. July 9, 1771; and Nathan m 
Eunice Painter, July i, 1773.3 ^she d. 
Mch. II, 1813, a. 62; he, Apr. 29, 1824 
a. 92.] '^' 

7. Polly, b. June ig, 1775. 
S. Laura, b. June 3, 1779. 

0. John, b. July 9, i7S_>. 

Rebeckah Woolsey m. Stephen Scott 
1734- 

Azariah Woolworth m. Rebekah Allen 
of Woodbridge [grand-dau. of David 
Wood], Apr. 5, 1S12. 

1. Chester Allen, b. Sept 5 1814 

2. Philemon Porter, b. Mch. 21, 1818 

3. Azariah, b. June 22, 1819 

4- James Harvey, b. Aug. '10, i8-.2 

5. Robert, b. Jan. 20, 1824. 

6. Franklin, b. Dec. 5, 1825 

7. Lyman, b. in Winchester, Sept. 16, 1828. 

Abigail Wooster m. R. C. Beebe, 1836.'" 

Albert Wooster, s. of Levi [eldest s. of 
Walter, and Ursula Beebe] m. Mitte 
Chatfield, d. of Joseph, Nov. 19, 1826. 

Charles W. Wooster of New York m 
Ellen A. Welton [d. of Ard], Oct. 16, 
1S42. She d. July 18, 1S43, a. 26.- 

Cleora Wooster m. J. J. Hollister, 1S42. 

Daniel Wooster, s. of David, m. Ruth 
Wheeler, d. of Obadiah of Southbury, 
Nov. 4, 1792. 

David Wooster and Mary [d. of Nath 
Gunn? Patience, Mary and Ann 
Wooster, grandchildren, are mention- 
ed in Nathaniel's will of 1767]: 

3. David, b. Dec. 21, 1756; d. Feb., 1757. 

4. Mary, b. Mch. 10, 1760; d. June, 1796. 

5. Eunice, b. July 22, 1761. 

Mary d. Oct. 5, 1761, and David m. 
Ann Doolittle, d. of Thomas, Tan 7 
1762. -' .' 

6. David, b. Nov. 2, 1762. 

7. Hannah, b. Oct. 16, 1764. 

8. Anna, b. Sept. 22; d. Sept. 28, 1766. 

9. Ann, b. Dec. 24, 1767; d. June, 1S07. 

10. Phebe, b. Mch. 2, 1770. 

11. Rebecka, b. May 10, 1772. 



12. Sibel, 1 

and V 

13. Daniel, j 



b. Aug. 31, 1774. 



14. Naomi, b. Tune ifi, 1776 

15. Ruth, I 

,f, t""'' r. r , r''--^""'=^7, 1778. 

16. James Doolittle,) 

17. Abigail, b. June 27, 1780, 



David Wooster m. Anna Chatfield, Feb 
2, 1S21. 

Polly bap. Dec. 17, 1823. 

Elijah Wooster was m. to Mary Osborn, 
d. of Daniel, by Rev. Mark Leaven- 
worth, Apr. 4, 1764. 

1. Ephraim, b. Sept. 17, 1764. 

2. Mary, b. Dec. 10, 1767. 

3. Hannah, b. Sept. 27, 1769. 

4. Mary, b. Dec. 28, 1771. 

5. Sarah, b. May o, 1774. 



ADDITIONS TO THE FAMILY RECORDS. 



^1' 163 



Constant. Evans. 

been found at Salem nor in Waterbury 
It is said "lie married in 1770 Amy 
Lewis, his second cousin." Mrs. Jona- 
than Beebe and John Lewis were 
second cousins. After his thirtieth 
year he became a minister. He prob- 
ably studied under the direction of 
Rev. Jacob Green of Hanover, N. J., 
and was ordained May 29, 17S3. He 
preached in various places in New 
Jersev, until Nov. 8, 1785, when he 
removed to Yorktown, and remained 
pastor of the Presbyterian church for 
nearly forty years. 

Ebenezer Cook: 

Justus, grad. at Yale, 1779. , „, , 1 

Rozell, grad. at Vale, 1777; m. Sarah Blakeslee, 
June 10, 1784. He (not Ebenezer) was pastor 
at Montviile until his death, Apr. 18, 1798. 

Henry Cook, b. 16S3, s. of Henry, b. Dec. 
30, 1652, at Salem, Mass., to Henry 
and Judith (Birdsall), m. Experience 
Lyman. 

I. Martha, b. at Wallingford, Aug. 22, 1706; m. 
Nov. 18, 1729, Joseph Chittenden. 

Experience d. Oct. 8, 1709, and Henry 
m. Mary Frost, who d. July 31, 1718. 
Henry m. before 1720, his third wife, 
Mrs. Sarah, eldest dau. of Richard 
Towner, and wid. of Samuel Frost. 

Amos Culver: Clarissa, b. 1791, was dau. 

of the second wnfe. 
Abel Curtis, s. of Stephen, m. Freelove 

Bartholomew of Branford, Mch. 20, 

1741- 

I. Isaac, b. June 13, 1743- 

Lieut. Daniel Curtis, b. Aug. 7, 1707- 
Stephen Curtis, Jr., b. July 14, 1726, m. 

Thankful Royce, ijji ace. to Walhng- 

ford records. 

7. Thomas, bapt. Apr. 6, 1766. 

Capt. Michael Dayton d. Sept. 22, 1776, 
a. 55. His wife d. July 9, 1813, a. 87. 

Enos Doolittle m. Mary Doolittle, June 
25, 1747, and d. in Wallingford, Oct. 
27, 1756. 

Katharine, b. Aug. 17, I749- 
]ohn, b. Dec. 31, 1754; d, 1755. 
Patience, b. May, 1756. 

Deacon David Dutton d. Feb. 20, 1774. 
a. 73- 

Ebenezer Elton had twenty-one chil- 
dren, the fourth, Bradley, b. Apr. 11, 
1742; Patience was the fifth. 

Charles English's wives were sisters, 
daus. of Asa Bronson. 

Randol Evans m. Phebe, dau. of John 
Warner. 

Marv; m. Levi Hubbard. 
Chlo'e; m. Moses C. Welch. 
Arad, bapt. Feb., 1766. 



Fenn. Hoadiey. 

Capt. Aaron Fenn, s. of James and 

Sarah (Buckingham) of Milford, b. 

Nov. 20, 1746; m. 1767, Mary Bradley 

of Woodbridge. 

Jeremiah, b. 1790. 

Thomas Fenn, b. Sept. 13, 1707, at Wal- 
lingford, s. of Edward and Mary 
(Thorp), m. Lydia Ackley, Mch. 22, 
1731. She d. 1741, leaving Lydia, 
Thomas, Samuel and Hannah. Oct. 
5, 1742, Thomas m. Christian Barker. 

Israel Frisbie's wife, Active, d. Aug., 
1791, a. 28. 

Israel, b. July 20, 1791. 

Richard Freeman (col.) had a son. 

Dolphine, b. about 1798. 

Joseph Gaylord, b. Mav i6, 1649, s. of 
Walter and Mary (Stebbins), m. July 
14, 1670, Sarah Stanley, dau. of John 
of Farmington. 

1. Sarah, b. July ii, 1671; m. Thomas Judd, Jr. 

2. Joseph, b. Au.g. 22, 167:;. 

3. John, b. Apr. "21, 1677; d. in Wallingford, 1753, 

leaving nine children. 

4. Elizabeth, b. 1680; m. Tos. Hikco.x. 

5. William; m. Joanna Minor of Woodbury. He 

lived m Woodbury and New Milford. He d. 

1753- 

6. Benjamin; lived in Durham. 

7. Mary; m. Stephen Welton. 

8. Abigail, bapt. in Farmington, Nov. 7, 16S6; m. 

Tames Williams. 

9. Joanna; m. Robert Royce of Wallingford. 

ID. Ruth; m. Stephen Hikcox and lived in Dur- 
ham. 



Isaac Griggs m. ^Mary Clinton, Oct. 21, 
1725, in New Haven. 

Lieut. Jared Hill, b. in North Haven, 
Aug. 10, 1736, s. of Obadiah and Han- 
nah (Frost), m. Eunice Tuttle, dau. of 
Daniel. He d. in Waterbury, Apr. 20, 
1816. Eunice, his wife, d. Dec. 28, 
1826. Of his twelve children, eleven 
were b. in North Haven. 

Jared, David d. unmarried, Lydia, and Mary 
settled in Ohio; the last two mar. father and 
son — Finch. Hannah, Eunice b. 1770, m. 
Daniel Frisbie, PoUv m. Jesse Munson, Susan 
m. Timothy Williams, Obadiah b. 1756, Lucy 
d. at 16, and Samuel, b. Sept. 12, 1784, lived in 
Waterbury; Charles, in Cheshire. 

Obadiah Hill, s. of Lieut. Jared. m. 

Lucy Frost of Harwinton. He d. Mch. 

25, 1813, and his wife d. five days after. 

He served, with his father, in the 

Revolution. 
Samuel Hill, s. of Lieut. Jared: 

5. Ellen Maria, b. June S, 1824. 

6. Robert Wakeman, b. Sept. 20, 1828. 

John Hine of Middletowm ni. Julia Ann 
Morriss, dau. of Julius, Oct. 28, 1844. 

Jude Hoadiey m. Naomi Tinker. For 
other Waterbury families see Hoadiey 
Genealogy. 



164 Ai> 



IIISTOUY OF WATERBUHY. 



Holmes. Lewis. 

Israel Holmes, a younp^ silversmith from 
Greenwich, where he was b. Dec. 20, 
176S, came to Waterbury about 1793. 
He was s. of Reuben Holmes, b. about 
1732, and Ruth AVood; grandson of 
Benjamin Holmes, who was living in 
Greenwich in 1721; great-grandson of 
Stephen, b. in Stamford, Jan. 14, 
1664-5, 111- to Mary Hobby, dau. of 
John, Nov. iS, 1686, and d. in Green- 
wich, 1 7 10; great-great-grandson of 
John, who was b. in England, m. 
Rachel Waterbury (dau. of John and 
Rose), May 12, 1659, and d. in Bed- 
ford, N. Y. John Holmes was s. of 
Francis and Ann, who were in Stam- 
ford as early as 164S. 

Isaac Hopkins: 

Ruth. iiDt Wealthy, m. Thomas Welton. 

Roswell Hopkins, of Nine Partners, 1768. 
Timothy Hopkins was deacon in 1743. 
David Hotchkiss m. Peninah Peck, wid. 
of Charles Todd. 

Frederick Hotchkiss was drowned at 
Windsor, N. Y. 

Gideon Mills Hotchkiss m. Arvilla 

Brooks. 
Lauren Hotchkiss m Nancy Hill. 
Samuel How m. Elizabeth Benedict, 

Nov. 14, 17S0. 
Elnathan Judd d about Jan. i, 1777. 
Eunice Judd d. Sept. 7, 1827, a. 52. 
Harvey Judd, s. of Isaac and Anna: 

.N'ancy Ann, 1). iSoi;'m. Marshall Hoadley. 

Lieut. Thomas Judd, b. about 1638, s. of 
Thomas, m. Sarah Steel, dau. of John 
of Farm. 

1. Thomas, b. about 1663. 

2. John; m Hannah Hikco.x. 

i. Sarah; m. Stephen Hopkins, Jr. 

William Judd, s of Thomas of Farming- 
ton, m. Mary Steele, dau. of John, 
Mch 30, 1658, and d. 1690. Mary d. 
Oct. 27, 1718, aged about So. 

1. Mary, b. 1658; m. Abel Janes. 

2. Thomas, bapt. Oct. 13, 1662; d. Jan. 4, 1747. 

3. John, b. 1667; d. at Farm 1710. " 

4. Rachel, b. 1670; d. unmarried. 

5. Samuel, b. 1673; m. Ann Hart, 1710, and Abi- 

gail Phelps, 1725. 

6. Daniel, b. 1675; m. 1705, Mercy Mitchell of • 

Woodbury, and d. 1748. 

7. Elizabeth, b. 1678. 

Rev. Mark Leavenworth was s. of 

Thomas and :\Iary (Dorman). She 
was b. iGSo to Edmund Dorman and 
Hannah, dau. of Richard Hull, who 
were m. 1661. Edmund d. 171 1. ' 

Rev. Amzi Lewis, s. of Samuel, was 
pastor of Pres. churches in Florida 
and North Salem. N. Y., and in North 
Stamford, Conn., where he died. 



Lewis. Peck. 

Asahel Lewis m. Sarah Atkins, dau. of 
Josiah, and had Larmon, Lawrence 
Sterne, Lucian, Asahel, and Sarah 
Clarissa. 

Caleb Lewis and Eunice Welton: 

Jacob, b. Sept. 7, 1736. 
Eunice, b. Apr. 6, 1738. 
Caleb, b. Apr. 15, 1752. 

Erastus Lewis, b. June, 1774, s. of 
Adonijah and Elizabeth (Newell), m. 
May 28, iSoi, Salome Booth, b. Mch. 
15, 1785, dau. of Robert. Removed in 
1S24 to Nevr Britain. 

Jacob Lewis, see Abner Lewis. 

Samuel Lewis, Jr., b. 174S; d. July 2S, 
,, JS22, a. 74. 

n/ Moses Luddington d. before Oct. 3, 175S. 

Thomas Mallory m. Elizabeth , who 

d. 1795, a. 69. 

Caleb Merriman m. [Margaret Robinson, 
dau. of Capt. Josiah and Ruth (Mer- 
riam), May 12, 1747, and d. Aug. 6, 
1797, a. 72. 

William Morriss m. Elizabeth Scott of 
Watertown, Sept. 3, 1848. 

Abner Munson was s. of Caleb Munson 
and Abigail (Brocket) of Wall., who 
were m. Apr. 23, 1735. Abner was b. 
Mch. 2, 1736; Hermon, Oct 28, 1738; 
Cornelius, Apr. 16, 1742; Benjamin, 
Aug. 23. 1744; and Caleb Mch. 13, 
1746-7. Caleb d. and Abigail m. Isaac 
Brons(.)n (3). 

Stephen Munson of Plymouth m. Sally 
Boughton, Sept. 18, 1842. 

George Nichols's will was dated Sept. 
15, 17S8, in which he mentions "my 
daughters Prue — wife of Dr. Daniel 

Southmayd — Susanna, and ]\Iolly 
Nichols." 

Simeon Nichols, b. Jan. 21, s. of Simeon, 
m. Jan. 7, iSiS, Roxana Prichard, b. 
May 19. 1794, and removed to Colum- 
bia, Ohio. 

John Painter m. Deborah Welsher, Mch. 
27, 1738, at Wall. 

Johannah, b. Jan. 31, 1739. 

Sarah, b. Apr. 2, 1741; m. lienj. Williams. 

John, b. May 29, 1743. 

Edward, b. Oct. 5, 1745. 

Susanna, b. Aui;. i^, 174S; m. Abel Ford. 

Henry H. and Harriet Peck: children: 

I. Henry Brandagee, b. Feb. 14, 1S41. 



d. in New Haven, 

Oct 5, 



i860. 



2. Harriet Maria, | 

and }■ b. Jan 6, 1843. 

3. Milton Haxtun, 1 d. in Madison, Ga., 

J Apr. 30, 1844. 

4. Katharine Louise, b. Jan. 19, 1845. 

5. Charles Milton, b. in Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 23 

1847; d. Dec. 16, 1849. 



ADDITIONS TO THE FAMILY RECORDS. 



-^p 165 



Perkins. Prindle. 

Elias Perkins m. Salh' Adams, dau. of 
Reuben. 

Jonathan Pond, s. of Phineas and Martha 
of Branfoi'd, was b. 1739. He m. 
Susanna Hungerford of Bristol, and 
Jeruslia Jerome. He had nine chil- 
dren, of whom were Phineas, b. before 
1770, and Philip, b. 1778. 

Dr. Daniel Porter's wife was dau. of 
Joshua Holeombe and Ruth Sherwood 
of Windsor. 

Edward Porter, s. of Ezra, d. in Troy, 
N Y., 1794. Heirs, his brothers and 
sisters, Francis, Nathan, Daniel, 
Joseph, Ezekiel, Ezra, Mary Buell, 
Elizabeth, Huldah Wilcox. 

Dr. James Porter and Lucy: 

5 Henry, b. June 2, 1775. 

Levi G. Porter, b. June 8, 1760, s. of 
Gideon of Farm , and Catharine Jones, 
b. Oct. 6, 1763, were m. Jan. 16, 1783. 

1. Samuel, b. Mch. 24, 1784. 

2. Huldah, b. Feb. 28, 1786; d. 1794. 

3. Philander, b. Feb. 19, 1788. 

4. Horace, b. June 15, 1790. 

5. Rhoda, b. Apr. 20, 1792; d. 1795. 

6. Levi Goodwin, b. Apr. 10, 1794. 

7. Abel, b. Apr. 15, 1796. 

8. Amanda, b. Aug. 18, 1798. 

9. Huldah, b. June 20, 1801. 
10. Rhoda, b. Oct. 25, 1805. 

Robert Porter m. 1644, Marj- Scott, dai:. 
of Thomas of Hartford: 

1. Mary, b. Feb. 24, 1646; m. Benj. Andrus. 

2. John, b. Nov. 12, 1648; d. before 1686. 

3. Thomas, b. Oct. 29, 1650; m. May, 1678, Abigail 

Cowles, and d. 1719. 

4. Robert, b. Nov. 12, 1652; d. 1-689. 

5. Elizabeth, b. Jan. 11, 1653-4; m. Thomas An- 

drews, s. of Francis of Hartford. He lived in 
Milford, 1675-1700. 

6. Joanna, bapt Jan. 6, 1655-6. 

7. Sarah, b. Dec. 20, 1657; m. Abr. Andrus. 

8. Benjamin, b. Mch. 18, 1659-60; d. 1689. 

9. Hannah, b Apr., 1664, m. John Browne. 
ID. Hepzibah, b. ^Ich. 4, 1666. 

Robert mar. , after 1675, Hannah, wid. 
of Stephen Freeman of Newark. 

Stephen Porter, s. of Thomas, m. Lydia 
Manvill of Watertown. 

Daniel Potter d. Oct. 29, 1773; his wife 
was aged 54 yrs. 

Russell Potter of West Troy, N. Y., m. 

Sarah Scott, Apr. 22, 1840. 

Benjamin Prichard of Watertown m. 
]\lrs. Alma Prichard, Apr. 10, 1842. 

David Prindle m. Hope Wetmore: 

Rachel, b. Oct. 15, 1775; m. Dr. R. S. Wood- 
ward of Watertown; Sally m. Jacob Turner; 

Linus; Rebecca m. Bronson; Eleazer; 

Jonathan; Rhoda m. Welton; Ruth m. 

Asa Bronson; David; Hannah m. Eleazer 
Woodruff; Chauncey; Eunice m. Hershel 
Welton. 



Prindle. Strickland. 

John Prindle, s. of John; will dated May 
5, 1760 — 'being going on the expedi- 
tion against Canada." 

Obadiah Richards m. Hannah Andrews, 
b. Feb. 26, 1647, dau. of John and Mary. 

John Richason's dau. Ruth was wife 
of John Hill of Guilford in 1738. 

Deacon Josiah Rogers d. at Springfield, 
Oct., 1S03, of pleurisy. 

Col. Chauncey Root, s. of Enos, m. Hul- 
dah Fairchild, and for second wife 
Huldah's twin-sister, wid. Hannah 
Dutton. Removed West in 1843. 

Phineas Royce's second wife was dau. 
of Daniel Palmer of Branford. 

Miles Sanford /nay be Moses. 

Zachariah Sanford m. Sarah Curtiss, 
dau. of Stephen. 

Edmund Scott m. for second wife the 
wid. of Thomas Upson. 

Joseph. Edmund. Samuel, b. 1660; m. 1686, 
Mary Orvice; he died 1745, a. 85; she, Nov. 

28, 1748, a. 85. Elizabeth; m. ■ Davis. 

Hannah. Jonathan. George. David. Rob- 
ert, probably unmarried. 

Esther Scott, dau. of Dr. Daniel, prob- 

ablj" m. Amasa Preston. 
Gideon Seymour d. April 6, 1S04, at 

Paris, N. Y. 

II. Salmon, b. Nov. 2, 1779; d. Mch. 23, 1843, at 
Westmoreland, N. Y. 

Andrew Smith m. Rachel Tuttle. 

William Southmayd d. July 31, 1778, 
probably of small-pox. Irena m. 
Eliphaz Wright. 

Calvin Spencer, b. Apr. 21, 1766, s. of 
Isaac, d. 1S46. It is said of him b)^ one 
still living, that "we boys used to quit 
our play on the village-green and steal 
into the 'meetinghouse' on prayer- 
meeting nights when we heard Deacon 
vSpencer singing." 

Thomas; m. Sally Baldwin, and had si.x chil- 
dren. 

Harris; m. Thirza Buckingham, June 14, 1832, 
and had Ellen, b. June iq, 18:57; Julia A., b. 
Oct. 29, 1839; Sarah G., b.'iVlch. 8, 1842. 

Dr. Lucien; m. Harriet E. Thomas, and d. in 
trying to save his two boys from a burning 
house. All perished. 

Calvin, d. 1839. 

Gustavus; m. Julia Beecher, Nov., 1838. 

Isaac Spencer is said to have been a 
Separatist minister ' ' down East. " His 
wife died at the hoitse of her son, Cal- 
vin, at a time when a great freshet had 
swept away the bridge, and the funeral 
was delayed three days in consequence. 

Daniel Stow d. in the camp at Lake 
George. 

John Strickland d. Aug. 5, 1761, in camp 
at Crown Point with small-pox. 



!()(} ^P 



HISTORY OF WATERS URY. 



Stanlky. Tyler. 

Timothy Stanley, living in Waterbury 
1707, had land, "one parcel given him 
by the town (Famiington) which is 
called a soldier's lot." 

Jared Terrell: 

Esther; in. Capt. Levi Wooster. 

Letsom; m. Smith, and had Monroe, b. 

Feb. 4, 1816; m. 1844, Mary, dan. of David 

lieecher. 

Daniel Thomas, Jr., of New Haven m. 

Sarah Brown, dau. of James, Dec. 25, 
1735- 

Joshua Thornton m. Sally (Judd), wid. 
of Benj. Hoadley. 

Stephen Tinker m. Rachel Chatfield, 
dau. of Samuel, and d. in Pough- 
keepsie. 

Rev. Samuel Todd, b. Mch. 6, i-jib-ij. 

Samuel Towner, b. at Branford, 1690, 
youngest s. of Richard of Guilford and 
Branford (who d. in 1727), m. Rebecca 
Barnes, dau. of Thomas, Jan. 25, 1716, 
who d. Jan. 31, 1728, in Wallmgford; 
and he m. June 27, 1728, Amy Ward, 
b. Apr. 7. 1707, dau. of Captain Wil- 
liam of Wall. In 1 731 he removed to 
Waterbury, in 1739 to Goshen, to 
Woodbury, to Newtown, where in 1750 
he sold his lands for ;^2ooo, and 
moved on to the now town of Sherman, 
where he d. in 1784, a. 94. Of his 
thirteen children, Phebe, the eldest, b. 
Sept. 14, 1717, m. Arah Ward, brother 
of Amy, his second wife; Samuel, his 
eldest son, was living in Waterbury; 
1742, and must have died soon after, 
as his youngest son, b. 1746. was called 

Samuel; Lettice m. Pringle and 

lived on Phillips' Patent; Amy, b. in 
Waterbury, 1735, m. David Barnum 
of New Fairfield, and two .settled in 
St. John's, Canada. 

Dan. Tuttle: 

Simon and Salmon are elsewhere given as Lyman 
and Solomon. 

Jesse Tuttle m. Eleanor Warner, dau. of 
Ephraim and Eleanor (Smith). She 
was b. Sept. 28, 1757. 

Noah Tuttle removed, 1795, to Camden, 
N. Y. 

3. Sarah may be Laura. 

Obed Tuttle, b. June 26, 1776, at New 
Haven, s. of Reuben, m. Lucretia 
Clark. 

1. Rachel, b. Apr. 3, 1800. 

2. Lauren, b. Mch. 13, 1802. 

3. Eben Clark, b. Apr. 27, 1806. 

4. Leonard, b. Mch 3, 1S08. 

5. Philemon, b. Nov ig, 1814; m. 1836, Jane E. 

Eaves of Birmingham, Eng. 

Alma Tyler m. Elias Porter, 1817. 



Tyler. Wooster. 

Esther and Eunice Tyler had brothers, 
Isaac, Abram, Enos, Jacob and jNIiles, 
whose births should be on our records. 

Phineas Tyler m. Elizabeth Hoadley, b. 
1776, dau. of Jude. 

Jesse Upson, s. of Benjamin, was a phy- 
sician. He had a son, Benjamin, 
killed in the war of 1812. 

Arah Ward, b. in Wallingford, July 5, 
171S, s. of William and Lettice (Beach 
of Milford), m. in Goshen, Aug. 13, 
1740, Phebe Towner, dau. of Samuel. 

Diantha, b. 1741; m. David Candee. 

Daniel Warner: 

2. Sarah; m. John Hough, of Hanover, N. J. 

David Warner, s. of Benj., d. in Strat- 
ford, Mch. iS, 1794, a. 62. 

John Warner, Sr., m. Ann Norton, 
June 28, 1649; d. 1679, leaving John, 
Daniel, Thomas, and Sarah bapt. Mch. 
15, 1656-7, and m. William Higason. 
Daniel d. before Nov. 26, 1679. 

John Warner, Jr;, d. before Mch, 1706-7. 

I. John, b. Mch. i, 1670. 

3. Ephraim, d. Aug. i, 1753, in his 84th year. 

3. Robert of Woodbury, d. 1759. 

4. Ebenczer, b. 1677; was captain" and "doc- 

tor," and d. Apr. 26, 1755, a. 78. (Roxbury 
cemetery.) 

5. Lydia, bapt. Mch. 13, 1680-1; m. Samuel Bron- 

son. 

6. Thomas, bapt. 1683; d. before his father. 

John Warner m. y4««^Sutliff. 
David Wood: children: 

Olive; m. North of New Haven; Alonzo; 

Lorenzo. (Erase Ruth Allen.) 

Samuel Woodruff m. Jemima Judd, 

Sept. 6. 17S1. 
Israel Woodward m. ]\Ich. 31, 1731. 
Israel Woodward, Jr.: 

I. Israel Bard. 

Azariah Wool worth: erase granddait. 

of David U^ood. 
Albert Wooster m. Mitte (Chatfield), 

wid. of Lyman Smith. 
C. W. Wooster m. E. A. Welton, dau. of 

A rad. 

The following physicians, in addition 
to those mentioned in the second vol- 
ume, were living here between 1730 and 
1780: 

William Andrews, David Arnold (i 769), 
John Crane (176S), Daniel Clifford (re- 
moved to Stratford), 1769, Benjamin 
Hull, James Porter, Peter Powers (i755)> 
Daniel Scott (1733), Daniel Southmayd, 
Jesse Upson, John Warner, Ozias War- 
ner, William Warner (1773), Jonas Weed 
(I737-) 



II 



TOWN CLERKvS OF WATERBURY TO 1895, 

WITH THE DATES OF THEIR APPOINTMENT. 



1709, 
1712. 
1713, 
1717, 
1721, 

1755, 
1764. 
1782, 

1784, 
1787, 
1793. 
i8c4, 
1806, 
1S12, 
1817, 
1831, 
1837, 
1839, 
1S40, 
1841, 
1842, 

1843, 

1844, 
1847, 



JOHN STANLEY, 

THOMAS JUDD, Jr., 

Deacon THOMAS JUDD, 

JOHN HOPKINS, 

JOHN JUDD, 

WILLIAM JUDD, 

The Rev. JOHN SOUTHMAYD, 

THOMAS CLARK, 

EZRA BRONSON, 

MICHAEL BRONSON, 

ASAHEL CLARK, 

WILLIAM LEAVENWORTH, 

JOHN KINGSBURY, 

ABNER JOHNSON, 

ASHLEY SCOTT, 

JOHN KINGSBURY, 

ASHLEY SCOTT, 

ELISHA S. ABERNETHY, 

WILLARD SPENCER, 

CHARLES SCOTT, 

NORTON J. BUEL, 

SOLOMON B. MINOR, 

CHARLES SCOTT, 

Henry B. Clark, 
Horace Tuttle, 
appointed by the selectmen, 

SOLOMON B. MINOR, 

JOHN KENDRICK, 



1848, LUCIUS A. THOMPSON, 

1849, THEODORE S. BUEL, 

1851, WALES B. LOUNSBURY, 
John W. Smith, assistant, 

1852, SAMUEL C. WOODWARD, 
1854, ISRAEL HOLMES, 2d, 
1856, NELSON J. WELTON, 

1858, CHARLES W. GILLETTE, 

1859, NELSON J. WELTON, 
1861, CHARLES W^ GILLETTE, 
1S62, NELSON J. WELTON, 
1863, FRANKLIN L. WELTON, 
1869, GEORGE L. FIELD, 

f Charles D. Hurlburt, 

George H. Cowell, 
1870,- 

I Reese B. Gwillim, 

t assistants, 
1871, CHARLES B. MERRILL, 

1877, THOMAS DONOHUE, 2d, 

1878, JAMES C. WHITE, 

1881, THOMAS DONAHUE, 

1882, JAMES C. WHITE, 
1890, JAMES J. MADDEN, 

1894, FREDERICK B. MERRIMAN, 
appointed by the selectmen; 
served for a few weeks, 

1894, THOMAS F. McMAHON, 

1895, EDWARD H. BELDEN. 



/}f>i njf^ <f^T' '"■' ''"-^ "^^^ ^^orr^o^ j^"^ i--J'^^-■■ 



i;^/f:.«. /,^^ ^^ ^*'* /'^/a? c^ 















SOME AUTOGRAPHS OF EARLY SETTLERS. REPRODUCED FROM BRONSOn's " HISTORY." 



u 



